SC&A Dreams, Fantasies And Sex Registries...

We might have premature in announcing our impending recovery. Our illness has apparently inspired certain dreams and nightmares. We will recount the latest dream, from this afternoon's nap.

We dreamt we were in Weare, New Hampshire and we we watching the sheriff nail a notice of condemnation on a tree at the end of Justice Souter's driveway. Yup, the town had exerted it's right of eminent domain and the Supreme Court Justice was being booted out, to make way for a Bed and Breakfast, the Liberty Inn. It would be a small affair, with only 20 odd rooms, but there would be large reception and catering facilities. The Town of Weare looked forward to the tax revenue the already booked Liberty Inn would generate- room taxes, meal taxes, real estate taxes and so on. The Liberty Inn was a good idea. Of course, all the media was there- it was mayhem. The Liberty Inn could not have dreamed of better Public Relations.

Dreams being what they are, the next thing we saw were lines of bulldozers, all lined up and ready to. Snaking their way through all that big yellow Caterpillar equipment, were 2 large moving trucks. They were making their way up the driveway, ready to move the Souter's to their new home. Fast forward a few moments and the moving vans made a turn coming out of the driveway. Some, but not all of the media, began to follow the moving vans. Other media shrewdly waited and were rewarded. The minivan carrying the hapless Souter family soon came down the driveway and then other media started following the minivan. It was a comical sight indeed.

Soon, the former Souter house was being demolished by volunteers (hey, it was our dream- deal with it), much like an episode of Extreme Makeover Home Edition. There was whooping and hollering and the cameras broadcast every moment of the demolition, following the crews around and broadcasting what was to be the first and last tour of the Souter home. Everyone was scrambling to have their photo taken in front of the Souter home, before it was gone forever.

Before long, the platoon of yellow armor demolished the home, to the throngs of those cheering onlookers.

The dream progressed.

The media vans following the Souter family pulled in right behind them, as they stopped at an Olive Garden. Through the windows, America got to watch as the Souter clan feasted on the never ending soup and salad bar and the endless breadsticks. It was a pleasant meal, for the most part, marred by one sad event.

Apparently, Justice Souter wanted to pay by check. The fresh faced summer intern at the cash registered asked the Justice if the address on the check on the check was current.

You can guess the rest.

The Sheriff was called, and before long, the matter was straightened out. The manager OK'ed the check, personally, and apologized for the dozen, 'Yeah sure, you are a chief Justice like I'm really Tom Cruise. If you were really who you said you were, you would have left a better tip.' Anyway, it all worked out.

As the dream drew to a close, we saw Justice Souter pull up to bottom of the long driveway to his new house. There were lots of people there to welcome him, cheering and applauding. It was heartwarming, really.

Then, it happened. A Sheriff's vehicle that was escorting the moving vans stopped at the bottom of the driveway. The deputy got out and posted a notice of condemnation on a tree.

It seems that the Liberty Inn was so popular that the developers wanted to open another. You guessed it- Justice Souter had such a good eye for real estate that K Hovnanian wanted to open a Liberty Inn Bed and Breakfast franchise of their very own!

Just as we were about to awake, in the in between state, so to speak, we had a great idea.

You know how there are registries for sex offenders? Well, there needs to be a registry for SCOTUS Justices that voted for the right to declare eminent domain at will, so we'd know where they lived. They would have to register their home addresses.

We think if the the Justices had to do that, they might come to better understand why so many people think that it was a lousy idea.

With the registry they would- sooner or later.

MMM-MMM Good- Or Not

We were on the mend until we saw these stories. Any thoughts of a returned appetite were quickly diminished.

How about a fish fry?

Fishermen in northern Thailand have caught the biggest catfish on record -- a 646-pound (293-kg) giant the size of a grizzly bear -- and eaten it, the WWF and the National Geographic Society said on Wednesday.

The giant catfish, believed to be the largest freshwater fish ever found, was caught along the Mekong River, home to more species of massive fish than any river on Earth.

A non alcoholic lunch for a legislator? One shudders at the thought!

A lunch meeting between a leading parliamentarian in Belgium and counterparts from Iran has been canceled because the beer-loving Belgian could not stomach a ban on alcohol.

"Even for the tolerant Herman De Croo, that was a bridge too far," De Croo, a Dutch-speaking Liberal, told De Standaard daily Thursday.

Ambiance- there is nothing like enjoying a meal in a place meant to enhance the experince.

It may take a strong stomach to eat curry or chocolate ice cream out of a toilet bowl, but a commode-themed restaurant in Taiwan does booming business serving up just that.

The Martun, or toilet in Chinese, restaurant in the southern port city of Kaohsiung boasts lengthy queues on weekends as diners wait for a toilet seat in its brightly colored tile interior.

Food arrives in bowls shaped like Western-style toilets or Asian-style "squat pots."

And last but not least,

A restaurant owner in the eastern Ontario city of Kingston is trying to break the record for a massive hamburger.

Ian Sarfin of Ian’s Kitchen and Soda Shoppe says he hopes to beat the Guinness world record currently held by a pub in Pennsylvania.

That U.S. version tipped the scales at 6.75 kilograms

Sarfin’s creation — which took more than three to cook Thursday morning — weighs almost 10-kg. (about 21 pounds) and is 38 centimetres across and five cms. high.

Wait, it gets better. Read all about it, here. In the meantime, we're going back to tea and crackers.

Slowly, But Surely

We are slowly recuperating. We now feel as if we are in a life raft on 60 foot seas- the 150 foot seas are a thing of the past. Hopefully, by tomorrow, we'll be merely nauseous.

Some things help our recuperation process. This teacher was only conducting an experiment.

Can you imagine 82 years of, 'where are the socks?'

You want your kids to live with you until they're 30. You know you do.

How could the EU not want Turkey to join in, with this on line?

Green and purple ketchup- can blue milk be far behind? Maybe that's next up, after this.

And lastly, final mistakes are now a thing of the past.

On that happy note, we're going horizontal for a while.

The SC&A Development Corporation And SCOTUS

Here's the deal- we don't like where you live.

That's right, we don't like where you live- and we intend to do something about it.

Armed with the US Supreme Court's (SCOTUS) latest decision, we are going to petition your town and county to kick you and your mangy neighbors out of your homes. We will pay you the appraised value of that hovel you live in, not a penny more. The appraised value is lower than the actual value of your home, you say? Too damn bad. You didn't bitch when you had to pay taxes based on the appraised value- why should we give a damn as you incessantly whine about value now? Did you call your county tax assessor to tell him your home was under appraised, and therefore you needed to pay more tax? We thought not- so quit your snivelling, whining and moaning, OK?

Here is how it works. SC&A have decided we're not rich enough and can't get richer. Group therapy has cut into our profits. That, and the fact that we are sick and tired of listening to you drone on about your meaningless lives and us having to pretend we care. As we have told you before- we don't give a rats ass.

Anyway, we have decided to augment our already outrageous income by forming the SC&A Development Corporation.

We are going to knock down that shack you live in and build McMansions. That's right- we are going to build huge, ostentatious and utterly tasteless abodes that will attract only those stupid enough to buy them and pay outrageous taxes- and thus, the SC&A Development Corporation and the county both benefit.

As the builder, we shall make between 20%-30% per home (industry average) and the city and county will make bigger bucks providing fewer services for an inflated tax bill.

Naturally, we are thrilled with the idea. Of course, you all want to know how we will sell our McMansions at a grossly inflated price. We are happy to tell you.

We equip each kitchen with restaurant style equipment, all oversized and all stainless steel. The fact that so many potential buyers can't cook at all is a plus. They can believe they are deceiving their friends who know they can't cook into thinking they now can cook.

Their will be a huge wet bar, of course, outfitted with a beverage fridge (keeping that no name brand of swill you call beer in the fridge isn't good enough- you have to store that case of 'Hog Hollow's Best' in the wet bar fridge of course.

Of course, you'll have to have a bathroom large enough to impress everyone you meet. That bath has to be on the house tour, so it will have to be clean at all times.

If you need to go, use the facilities off the garage. You can always shower outdoors, under the oscillating sprinkler, or share a bath with the kids.

(As an aside, an English friend of ours once commented on a bathroom we shown on a 'house tour.' The bath was spectacular, an enormous series of rooms, with a huge built in tub, surrounded by rocks and 'waterfall's effect, etc. There were lilies floating on the 'pond' and candles lit all over the room and on 'rock' ledges and floating on the 'pond' as well. The shower had a hammock. It was something to see, truly.

Our friend, without thinking, blurted out to our hostess, "I can't understand the fascination you Yanks have with the loo. We go in, we shit and we leave."

For some reason, we have not been invited back.)

Forgive our short digression.

We want to be perfectly clear- we don't care where you go or where you end up. We are going to make money off of you, whether you like it or not.

Please hurry up and pack your Walmart decorated furnishings and leave.

We are on a mission from SCOTUS to make the neighborhood a better place- and you are just in the way.

Stuff, Statistics, Sex And Salad

A visit to our esteemed colleagues, medical professionals all, confirmed our illness and they diagnosed us as being afflicted with a particularly nasty and tenacious flu bug. Despite a rather uncomfortable evening, we seem to be on the mend, and we are grateful for that.

The panapoly of home remedies, from whiskey and tea to spiked chicken soup, has been an entertaining, if not neccesarily effective method of battling the bugger bug.

OK, onwards. Here are a few topics on which you can sound reasonably intelligent (and fool every one). In Darfur, the atrocities continue at full force, with no end in sight. The UN, with a perfect track record of never resolving a conflict, is now being forced to change the subject, when it comes to Darfur. The brilliant UN PR people have decided to point to another UN failure, Haiti, by declaring that country an even greater failure (according to them) than Darfur. Yup, we need more of the UN.

Maxed Out Mama will appreciate this (she's mad about statistics, I tell you, mad. Go, read and learn). Apparently, Big Bad Tony's Great Britain is the best place to invest money in Europe. Enough said, despite the temptation to ramble on.

Here's a piece on affirmative action in the Middle East. Food for thought, anyway.

The Bird Flu hits China. Not to worry- the Chinese will give us accurate reports.

For the, er, lesser endowed man, there's good news- either that or the 'touchy feely' thing is influencing reality.

Lastly, here is the absolute best reason to eat your salad.

Playing God, And Other Minor Diversions

The inevitable is about to concur- and some would say we are getting closer and closer to playing God.

"US scientists have succeeded in reviving the dogs after three hours of clinical death, paving the way for trials on humans within years...

Tests show they are perfectly normal, with no brain damage.

"The results are stunning. I think in 10 years we will be able to prevent death in a certain segment of those using this technology," said one US battlefield doctor.

What say you? Is there a morality and ethic here, as there is with cloning? Or, is this a matter of technology, only?

If we can indeed bring this technology to the battlefield, to what lengths will go to in justifying war? If the threat of casualities is diminished, will our foreign policiy change?

To what lengths would our adversaries go?

Read the story, here.

A Grim(m) Tale

We are still under the weather- so much so, that we doubt there are enough badly behaved children or pets for us to abuse, to help us alleviate our suffering.

Thanks to all of you who wrote and offered up remedies. To that special person who suggested a wee bit of whiskey, added to honey, tea and cayenne pepper, be advised that we tripled the suggested amount. No point in short changing any one of us.

Now, we have a modern day fable we'd like to share with you.

Once upon a time, there were two men who needed our help. We weren't too sure if we wanted to help these men- they didn't exactly have the best work track record, but since they could help us out, we agreed, as long as certain conditions were met. They promised they would change their ways and behave responsibly.

They promised they would keep their part of the bargain

The men promised to do a good job and we gave them the special vehicles they needed to get that job done. For a while, the men did exactly as they had promised. They kept their word and they drove those vehicles responsibly. They worked hard and were getting the job done

One day, things changed. The men decided they would no longer behave responsibly. They would no longer abide by the agreements they had made and they decided to bite the hand that fed them- our hands. They had the vehicles we gave them and they were going to do as they pleased

Soon enough, the men started doing things and going places that we never intended. They started to drink and drive and inevitably, in a self induced drunken stupor, they were killing people left and right.

They had chosen to misuse what we gave them. They made decisions that caused the deaths of many people.

Some people said it was our fault, because we were the ones who gave them the vehicles in the first place- even though they made the bad choices, themselves.

Not all fairy have happy endings. In the end however, all fairy tales teach us a lesson.

NG, Paddles and Drugs

Thank you for the all the notes and letters- the vast majority of which did not indicate pleasure in our discomfort or prayers for our long, painful and tortured demise.

We take great comfort in your (for the most part) kind wishes and in particular, we would like thank NG for not calling, bugging, whining, hovering or playing FN (Florence Nightingale), too much. Despite her her incapacitation and discomfort, she was ready to kayak down to minister to us in our moment of need. We explained that our moment could be addressed by a Mellow Mushroom pizza delivery. Satisfied with that news, NG put her kayak paddle back in it's place.

Of course, her magnificent behavior can be directly attributable to her being laid in up and under the influence of narcotics, the amount of which would normally draw a sentence of 12-20 in any state penitentiary.

Better living through chemicals, we say.

In the meantime the SC&A Institute for Psychtropic Drug Research labors on, in search of the next breakthrough. Applications for drug test volunteers are now being accepted. In the words of our drug test manager, 'Rock on, dudes.'

We must answer the door now. Mr Kim, our nice Korean neighbor has prepared a special broth for us. MMM.

Just Another Manic Monday

We are under the weather today, having been informed by a physician, witch doctor and crystal festooned, earth shoe wearing and earth mother healer type, that we have the flu.

That said, posting will be light for the next day or so, which no doubt will be of delight to some of you. Of course, a day off just might be the battery recharge we need to return to top form. For the moment, we will concentrate on chicken soup, orange juice and plenty of rest.

We will post every now and then, in between administering beatings to pets and children, electro shock treatment and psychotropic drug therapy.

Any home remedies for kicking this flu bug (as opposed to kicking pets and children) would be most appreciated.

*UPDATE2* Who's Land Is This?

Beth, of My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, has a post up- actually, more self reflective than anything else. In that, the mirror to a degree, is pointed at ourselves.

She is tired, very tired. It is a difficult post to read, because she talks about some things few others do. Beth raises a lot of points we can agree with- and a few we don't, but that is less relevant.

Beth's main thesis is that she believes the anti war movement in this country will do anything- anything- to end the Iraq war. They wish to reestablish themselves by repeating the 'success' they had in ending the Vietnam war. How they go about that is something we can look at later, but there are a few things we need to clarify, first.

There is no correlation between the wars in Iraq and Vietnam. They are nothing alike.

The war in Vietnam was a real quagmire, against a real enemy with significant military power and the support of a vast population.

The war in Iraq is a war against terrorists and those that would reimpose Saddam-like savagery in a moment, if given the chance. There is no popular support for the insurgents- terrorists who shrewdly calculate their import by selectively bombing and murdering opposing religious factions and innocent civilians, in the name of God or politics.

Many anti war protestors are in reality, advocating for the success of those insurgents. There is no moral stand there- none whatsoever.

The war in Vietnam was a war about political ideologies. The anti war proponents were of the belief that communist or socialist forms of governments were superior to free market and democratic societies. They believed in the Marxist ideologies so much that they turned a blind eye to Pol Pot and his excesses, even as they were happening, because he proclaimed himself to follow that Marxist/Socialist ideology.

It is fair to say that every single non democratic regime, adopted by the left has failed miserably. Further, those regimes turned out to be far more repressive than imagined. The celebrated North Vietnamese, for example, caused the death of untold hundreds of thousands in the 're-education camps.' While the left proudly hoists itself on their anti war petard, they are conspicuously silent on the generations of atrocities their North Vietnamese protaganists perpertrated. There is not a single example that the left can point to as an example of an ideological stand worth defending- not a single one. The regimes adopted by much of the radical left today employ slavery, Female Genital Mutilation, 'honor killings,' racist and hate filled educational systems, religious persecution and other repressive and repulsive behaviors. Despite all these realities, much of the radical left insists that it speaks real American values.

Eastern Europe under communism is no more, and Cuba is as repressive as it ever was. China remains at the forefront of human rights violators and the Arab world is floundering in a sea of irrelevance. That once proud nation has been relegated by it's tyrannical leaders and politicized religious establishment, to the backwardness that defines the word. What do those regimes all have in common? They are endorsed and supported by much of the radical left. The bigotry and vile hatred too, are absorbed into the quilt that is the radical left. If past history is to serve as any kind of indicator, regimes adopted by the left is a sure barometer of their moral emptiness and certain failure down the road.

The war in Iraq is also fueled in part, by ideology- that all men are destined to be free. Still, we did not go to because of an ideology alone. We went to war because Saddam posed a threat to the region and to the world. UNSCOM was not surveying Iraq because the government of postage stamp sized Liechtenstein didn't answer the door when they rang the bell. The UN was in Iraq because Iraq posed a threat- and promised to threaten, again.

We went to war to stop that threat. If our intelligence was wrong, shame on us for not having up to the minute information. The same can be said for the UN, the British, French and a host of others. They too, concurred with our assessments. Nevertheless, removing Saddam did not come fast enough for his victims- hundreds of thousands in killing field mass graves, the victims and their families of the rape rooms and plastic chippers and those simply thrown off buildings or otherwise mutilated.

The only thing leaving Saddam in place would have accomplished, are the guaranteed deaths of millions of more in the region. The support for other tyrannies and hatreds in the region will only guarantee more of the same.

Iraq had used WMD against the Kurds and the Iranians. It is clear that the radical left does itself no credit by ignoring that reality and pretending that the human rights outrages are committed by the US. It is clear that the radical left that espouses those beliefs and others, and spewing hatred toward others that have different ideologies, will never be considered moral equals.

In what is a clear and unequivocal example of some of the more radical left's unabiguous descent into moral depravity, an article titled 'The Trouble With Judaism,' was published on the Etherzone, a web site that publishes pieces from the hard right and left. "

The Jewish messianic spirit is "a powerful weapon" in the establishment the New World Order, a totalitarian world government run in the interest of what the Protocols of Zion call "an aristocracy of the rich."

The article goes on to quote Israel Shamir, who might be gently described as insane, as saying the following:

Shamir notes that the US "which is as Jewish as Italy was Catholic" has banned mention of Allah and the Koran in the schools of occupied Iraq.

This of course, is patently absurd. And this is what passes for some of the radical left's 'intellectual' output. The entire article is a jumble of mistruths, half truths and out and out bigotry- nowadays, so eagerly adopted by much of the radical left. What much of the radical left and others have forgotten is the absolute truth that those who have adopted anti semitism, as defined as anti jewish sentiment, have always had at their root, evil as their agenda. There are no examples of an anti Jewish agenda being promulgated by those with a moral agenda.

We are not at all opposed to fair and open debate and dissent. We demand it. In the true context of dissent, it is a noble and patriotic venture. We all welcome a critical look at the status quo and we need a vigorous opposition, if for no other reason than to keep us on our toes and keeps us from the lethargy that in the end, hurts us.

Nevertheless, when the dissent turns to no more than an open call for destruction and vilification of all in opposition, that dissent becomes something else. It is one thing to question what goes on in Guantanamo Bay- it is quite another to deliberately misrepresent the truth so as to gain political advantage and in the process, destroy our opponents- and to give those that would happily hurt us, much comfort.

Could that great American patriot, the late Democrat Senator from NY, Patrick Daniel Moynihan have sat in the Senate today? Probably not. He was famous for crossing party lines when he had to, in support of what his conscience told him was right. Unlike today, Mr Moynihan understood that no one is wrong all the time and political opponents could have good ideas- ideas that might, with a bit of effort and compromise, serve the American people.

What a tragedy for our nation, if the likes of a Patrick Moynihan were to be excluded from public service because of what passes for politics today.

We believe that if partisans of either stripe, liberal or conservative, were more honest, they would be more effective. There is a great credibility attributed to the man or woman whose views do not cause rolling eyes in the heartland. There is a greater credibility attributed to the man or woman who elicits 'There's an honest man/woman' from either side of the political spectrum, in the coffee shops of this great country.

Beth is tired- not of the debate or dissent, we believe, but at the lack of said debate and dissent. What and who have we become? To whom did Lincoln bequeath stewardship of the country?

The following words, uttered by a certain President, before the Civil War, were to prove to be prophetic:

"We cannot escape history.

We will be remembered in spite of ourselves.

No personal significance or insignificance, can can spare one or another of us. The Fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation."

-Abraham Lincoln, from his annual message to Congress, December 1, 1862

*UPDATE* As a result of a few emails we have received, we have clarified our positions in the body of the post. The updates and amendments are in red text.

*UPDATE2* Kimberly, of Music and Cats, rightfully pointed out a glaring error on our part in a comment. We wrongly referred to the Etherzone as a 'prominent radical left web site.' As Kimberly pointed out, whatever Etherzone is, we incorrectly labeled it as being 'hard left.' It appears to be aggregation of posts, radical and otherwise, from both the keft and right. We were pointed to the article we referred to, as well as several others, of the same genre, via an email. We were remiss in our characterization of Etherzone.

Thank you, Kimberly, for pointing our mistake out. Tongue in cheek, we can remark that you are a student of Ronald Reagan's famous dictum: 'Trust, but verify.'

Granny Says Viagra Is Da Bomb!

Apparently, there is great truth to the old saying, 'Love hath no fury like a woman scorned.'

"Furious their romance was ending, a 78-year-old great-grandmother shot her 85-year-old ex-beau dead as he read the newspaper in a senior citizens home, police said.

"I did it and I'd do it again!" Lena Driskell yelled to officers who arrived at the home...She is accused of plotting the shooting of Herman Winslow because she was angry their yearlong romance was ending and he had found another companion."

When mamma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.

Sometimes, We Wonder Why We Blog

The Anchoress has a great roundup of links that cover all the important stuff. You'll agree with her take on some things, disagree with others and not know what to think about yet other things.

And that, dear group therapy readers, is what good blogging is all about.

In her post, The Anchoress discusses the Supreme Court, the latest on Stem Cell research, the story that the main stream media chose to ignore and more.

Read her post and her blog. Agree, be outraged or non-plussed.

SC&A Educational Series: How Not To Sound Stupid Talking About Real Estate

In the interest of educating our readers, we thought we would touch on a few matters that might help you sound more intelleigent when talking about the current real estate boom. In adition, you will become more aware of how this 'boom' and inevitable crash will affect you, even if you don't invest, speculate or even own a home.

Interest only mortgages are not really mortgages- they are loans. In most states, that means if you default, you can not only lose your property, but the bank can come after you and other personal assets you (probabaly don't) have. Watch for the inevitable court cases, featuring, whining, crying investors, having lost their money speculating on real estate.

Banks typically sell their mortgages. That means that the bank is more than happy to lend money to every Tom, Dick and Harry. In many instances, the very day you close on your loan, the bank begins the process of unloading the mortgage.

Why is this important? Two reasons, First, the bank made it's money off of you via points, closing costs, etc. You become yesterday's fish- you are of no use to the bank. Secondly, and even more importantly, if the housing bubble bursts, the banks will not own milions of pieces of defaulted upon property. Of course, you (meaning all us taxpayers) may end up have to bail out the morons that actually bought the loans in the first place. That's right- the tax payers will have to bail the bastards out. This isn't new- back in the 80's there was a company called Resolution Trust (RT) that we had to bail out. It all worked out of course, and the principals (and their proxies) of RT made out like bandits, cash wise and property wise (they bought the best properties for pennies on the dollar).

If you were stupid enough to actually take out an interest only loan, we have a few suggestions.

First, learn to pray and spend a good deal of time doing just that.

If the real estate market tanks (and it will), chances are your home will be worth less than the mortgage you have not been paying principal on. That's right- you're screwed. Imagine yourself paying new car sticker price on a used car, year after year.

Here, let us explain that more clearly. In the 80's, the Japanese came into the US real estate market with a bazillion dollars. They bought real estate like junkies buy dope in a crack house on payday. They bought Rockefeller Center in New York.

They bought at the top of the market and overpaid to boot.

They could not charge enough rent to service the mortgage debt (and they had a real mortgage) and the NY real estate market was collapsing. They lost their shirts, and then some.

Now, think of all the idiots that bought real estate that is not income producing and without a real mortgage. In addition to losing their property if the bubble bursts, they may very well lose their shirts and might not be able to just walk away.

Now, Maxed Out Mama has been writing about Real Estate and the bubble for a while now. Peruse her site and archives (that means scroll down) and do a search (Duh, type real estate in the search box). She is a whole lot smarter on the subject than we are. We consider he site an important resource.

Now, reread this and Maxed Out Mama and people might actually think you know what your talking about.

Mississippi Smolders

SC&A wrote a guest post for Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, on the Edgar Killen conviction and sentencing today.

It was a difficult post to write, for many reasons- not the least of which we were more than a bit critical of the State of Mississippi.

It is natural to want to pat ourselves on the back today- but we probably don't deserve to.

Read what we wrote, here.

It Was Never About Oil, And Other Annoying Truths

Some readers have made the argument that we went to war in Iraq for oil.

While that argument has a bit of sex appeal, we suppose, the reality is very different.

If oil was a primary reason to go to war, we could have saved ourselves hundreds of billions of dollars of war costs, simply by agreeing to lift the UN sanctions. That's right. We would have all the access to oil and we would not have incurred any of the current liabilities. Clearly, oil wasn't at the base of it.

As for US recognition of a Palestinian state in the region, American policy has been remarkably consistent: cessation of hostilities, diplomatic recognition and secure borders. That has been the focus of every single administration since 1948. There could have been a Palestinian state, of course: The UN partition plan of 1948 called for the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. That was rejected. After the Arab initiated 1967 war, the Khartoum declaration precluded negotiation (land for peace) and instead demanded hostilities. History cannot be rewritten. See this and this. Them's the facts, folks.

As for US military bases, we already have bases in the region- in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE.

Iraq was indeed a literate society. So was pre war Germany. We believe that the husbands, fathers, brothers and children of the victims of Saddam's rape room might have a far clearer assessment of just how bad Saddam's regime really was. That's a good enough place to start, anyway. We suppose the families of the many hundreds of thousands of found buried in vast unmarked graves might have a thing or two to add.

Mr Bush was in office for about 8 or 9 months when 9/11 happened. The transition teams had not even completed their work. It is unlikely that a war with Iraq was planned before all the new appointees knew where the bathrooms were.

What we can be sure of is that Mr Bush relied on the same intelligence Mr Clinton did.

"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons...."

Read Mr Clinton's statement, here. Funny, no mention of oil.

Focus, Focus

Miguel left an interesting comment to our post below:

"If you look at the number of "attempted attacks on Americans" over the past four years, I'm sure you'll find it is greater than 1.2 million. Just because the perpetrators were Americans and the attacks were not caused by religious differences, you dismiss them.

Let's be honest, you just don't like 'em people... c'mon... we like you... you can say it..."

Well Miguel, we find ourselves in good company- with you.

We don't like the bigotry, racism and hatred, any more than you do. We don't like the way a religion has been politicized and agendized to serve tyrants and despots, any more than you do. The adherents of those agendas are people we do not like at all.

We don't like those who oppress others, or instill fear into those that don't agree with them. We don't like the regimes and their supporters that have kept a once proud people, in the bonds and shackles.

We could go on, but you get the point, we're sure. We know you don't disagree with us, either.

As to your insinuation that I am dismissing crime, that is hardly the case. It is also an unfair analogy. Let's compare apples to apples.

We were referring to cross border acts of terror, no more, no less. Whether from Gaza or the West Bank, the Israelis faced 24,000 acts of terror or attempted. As we said, the US equivalent borders being Canada of Mexico- imagine if there were proportional attacks from those frontiers. Fortunmately, our neighbors to the north and south are not so adversarial.

Now, obviously, we can't send troops in every time there are less than perfect regimes (we were going to make a joke about Italy, but we decided against it). Still, we can pick and choose the times and places that are most likely to return good results- meaning that people, given the opportunity, will choose freedom over tyranny.

To be clear, as far as we are xconcerned, the jury is still out on whether libertating Iraq was a good idea. Not because it wasn't the right thing to do- clearly, it was. Clearly, Saddam was a butcher of the highest order and clearly, as Mt Bush and Mr Clinton before him said, Saddam was a threat to the west and the region.

Our scepticism is based on the reality that real democracy's are built on the blood of patriots. We have yet to see a critical mass of Iraqis rise up and say, 'enough!' and engage their terrorist neighbors. Instead, they are depending on the Coalition forces and administrators to present them with a fait accompli- a ready made democracy. Sadly, it doesn't work that way. As to how things will turn out, we don't know- but we also do not for an instant think that ridding Iraq of the hated barbarian, Saddam, was an exercise that should not have taken place.

Lastly, Square1 says in a comment that it is about acting, not talking. We couldn't agree more.

That said, in the end, it is the institutions that are supposed to deal with these matters that are refusing to act- the same institutions that would excoriate us if we acted on our own.

As we already know.

Why The Answer To 'Can't We All Get Along' Is 'No'

Yesterday, Square1 left a comment on our post about the failures of the UN. In it, she asked, fairly, we we need to focus on the past. Why, she asks, can't we just move forward.

Admittedly I'm sticking to shallow waters because this discussion is way deeper than I am accustomed to. There are crises all over the world. There are people who choose to commit these crimes, people who choose to fight them, people who suffer at the hands of them, and those who choose to turn a blind eye. All of them are everywhere. Any one of us can be one or all of those types of people at any time in our lives. Perhaps who is to blame is not really important anymore. Perhaps what is important now, is what are we going to do about what is? How are we going to help. How much money needs to be raised? How many volunteers are needed and what are they needed for? How much lobbying needs to be done? Who is going to fight against this stuff instead of simply raising a loud voice and then turning a blind eye? Finding who is to blame is not the problem here. How to fix the problem and prevent it is. How can we help these people?

In a nutshell, Square1 asks a question, that all of us, have at at one time or another asked, in our frustration as we watch helplessly as events spiral out of control.

If there were an easy answer to your question, Square1, you would know it by heart now. Here are a few examples of why dealing with the issues is very relevant.

Let's use Israel as a first example. Today, that country is being asked to ease checkpoint and travel restrictions. Sounds like a fair enough proposition. To allow Palestinians more freedom of movement can only ease tensions in the region, right? Well, that may very well be true.

It is also true that may not be the case. Just yesterday, a Palestinian woman was caught trying to smuggle explosives into Israel, to be detonated in a hospital, by her own admission. That's right, in a hospital, where she was undergoing long term treatment. She wanted to kill the very people that were caring for her. Nightly news broadcasts showed her trying to detonate the explosives when caught.

Suppose we faced the same problem on our northern or southern borders. Suppose we had suffered through or thwarted 24,000 terror attacks. Do you think our government ought to capitulate to those who suggested our borders were too restrictive and needed to be opened up even more?

Let us be perfectly clear as to what we are talking about: Israel has a population of 6,250, 000. In the last 4 years, there have been 24,000 terror attacks or attempted terror attacks. The US population is about 300,000,000- about 50 times as many. To understand what Israel faces, in real terms, the equivalent number of attacks and attempted attacks on US citizens would number 1,115,000. Just how receptive do you think we would be to the suggestion that we open our borders, after over a million attacks or attempted attacks?

One might argue that the issue is one of politics only, and therefore, changing the realities on the ground might be sufficient enough for people to 'wake up and smell the coffee.'

There is some truth to that- but that may also be no more than wishful thinking.

For some in the region, even talking to the Israelis can be verbotten. Jordanian Islamists will not attend an meeting that is an exchange between cultures because Jews will be attending. To their credit, they are open about their beliefs. At least we know who and what they are.

We have noted before that Muslims had nothing to do with the Holocaust, yet they embrace that evil and identify with it with great zeal. Reams have been written about the 'rightness' of Adolph Hitler and newspaper editorials (remember, Arab media in the region is government controlled) pine away wishing that 'If only Hitler had finished the job.' Arab media is replete with stories of Jews baking holiday and religious foods with the blood of gentiles.

And all this is taught in Arab schools. Children are taught that it is good to 'kill and be killed' in the name of Jihad.

Imagine if a foreign country that the US had diplomatic relations with, taught their school children that Blacks were devils and evil, and needed to be killed. Imagine that the religion of those Black persons were excoriated and became the object of derision and hatred. Imagine our reaction to the celebration of the murder of Blacks, as we witnessed dancing in the streets. Imagine our reaction as CNN broadcast images of screaming, frenzied people, calling to GAS THE BLACKS!

Then ask yourself where the UN stands on the matter.

Square1, the real issues have to be addressed. No, we may not be able to fix them- but we can identify them for what they are, and thus understand the motives behind their 'politics.' In doing so, we can do the right thing- and we can demand the 'right thing' from those that want our help.

Better Than Tupperware Parties

There are parties and then there are parties.

How about a party where you start on the A list, end up on the D list and you're happy, happy happy?

Would that work for you, or does your cup runneth over already?

Due To The Economy...

There is a wonderful list at Kurra's Place (don't ask, we have no idea).

The post is called "20 ways to maintain a healthy level of insanity." Obviously, we were intrigued and our interest more than a bit piqued. Below are a few extracts from the list:

At Lunch Time, Sit In Your Parked Car With Sunglasses on and Point A Hair Dryer At Passing Cars. See If They Slow Down.

Put Decaf In The Coffee Maker For 3 Weeks. Once Everyone Has Gotten Over Their Caffeine Addictions, Switch To Espresso.

Go To A Poetry Recital And Ask Why The Poems Don't Rhyme

When The Money Comes Out The ATM, Scream "I Won! I Won!"

Tell Your Children Over Dinner. "Due To The Economy, We Are Going To Have To Let One Of You Go."

There are plenty other gems to be found. See Kurra's Place here.

Oh yes, we had better be clear (we are responding to training rather well, don;t you agree?)- we found Kurra's Place via Michele. Have you heard of Michele?

She's got a small, itty bitty blog. Be nice and pay her a visit and leave a comment. Please, do that- she gets so lonely.

The UN Failed Because Of The US? Hardly!

In response to our post below, Miguel ( a regular and insightful reader) left an interesting comment, in which he squarely blames the inneffectiveness of the UN, on the US.

I'm sure you didn't think it was quite as ineffective when it endorsed the creation of the state of Israel, back in the day.

The united states has consistently tried to emasculate the united nations by using economic and political influence from the beginning. What americans want is another OAS, a rubber-stamping group of weakling nations bowing to the superiority of American Interests.

It is now common to expect that as soon as an organization begins to dissent from the American perspective, Washington begins to call for reform and/or outright dissolution. When a majority of other countries (even America's allies) dissent, it is summarily dismissed. Notice the Tokyo Accords... Even England comes to ask for a little hand-out, and even after backing the U.S. through thick and thin on the Iraq issue, the poor fool gets nothing.

You're right. The United Nations is ineffective and should be disbanded. America has fought long and hard to make sure that was the case.

We usually find ourselves in relative proximity to many of Miguel's considered political stances. This time, however, we are in direct opposition to them.

The UN that recognized the State of Israel is a far cry from the UN of today. The UN today is evidence itself of that reality. To blame the US for UN ineffectiveness is prepostrous.

Had the French and US not intervened, the matter of Bosnia would still be under discussion.

There has no example of UN intervention that has worked. The Middle East quagmire was deepened by the prompt removal of UN peacekeepers, in 1967, at the simple request of Egypt and Syria.

The UN has yet to seriously address the matter of FGM. Apparently, 100 million mutilated women are not enough to be of concern. That is in no way the result of American influence.

The UN stood idly by in Rwanda, Ivory Coast and a host of other places, because that body refused to do anything- despite American requests to get involved. The ongoing massacres in the Sudan are not the result of US interference. The UN's own inactvity speaks for itself.

The ongoing slave trade in Mauritania, is not American inspired. While the GIA went on a child rape and slaughter orgy in Algeria, the UN was nowhere to be found.

The makeup of the UN Human Rights Commission is laughable- and that was not the result of American influence. Countries that have all standards of measurement, horrible records in that department, see fit to exclude democratic representatives to that body. They ban reporters from covering their 'meetings.'

Millions have died because of UN indifference and yet that august body has seen fit to exorcise Israel to no end. If it weren't so tragic, it would be laughable.

In one week, Syria slaughtered up to 30,000 in Hama. The UN response? Zip. Nada. Nothing.

When the slaughter that killed tens of thousands in East Timor was going on, with forced conversions and forced circumcisions, the UN was at best, ineffectual- at worst, indifferent.

The only place the UN can be found exerting zeal is against Israel. Let's examine that.

What is it about Israel that makes it so deserving of UN vitriol? Was it about Israelis that the UN finds so abhorrent? What do you suppose that might be? Why is it that the matter of Israel is of much greater concern to the UN than situations that have cost millions of lives? To reiterate- millions of lives have been lost, yet for some reason, Israel has been the obsession of the UN.

Hmm. We wonder why that might be. See this. Then, when you're done, see this.

Why is it that states that are explicit in their hate toward religious minorities are considered moral equals? Why is it that states that openly call for the eradication of a certain group of people are treated as equals with democratic regimes?

No, the US isn't to blame for what the UN has become. That the US will not consider Iran or North Korea or Syria as paragons of virtue and goodness is a testament to our morality. We are not perfect, but when you play the comparison game, we come up looking pretty good- which might explain why the US is still the preferred destination for people in search of a better life.

There does not seem to be an immigration backlog into Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran or North Korea.

The US however, is to blame in part, for allowing the UN to go on and become what it is today.

If democracy isn't good enough at home, why should we allow the UN to become a forum for tyrannical regimes?

How on earth do countries that countenance FGM, slavery, other atrocities and bigotry, carry equal weight to democratic countries? The US and other free nations needed to make clear that wasn't the case. The idea that we could influence these countries by treating them as moral equals, clearly has not worked.

No, it isn't the US that destroyed the UN. Not even close.

Dancing The Night Away

Maxed Out Mama has a post on Sudan worth reading. She has some excellent links worth exploring.

We take a slightly different view than her when it comes to pointing fingers. Maxed Out Mama says,

The situation in Darfur is not the UN's fault, but the UN, as a body, also hasn't been able to act effectively to ameliorate or redress it.

SC&A see it differently. We believe that it is the UN's fault. The players involved know the UN is toothless and has never, ever, resolved a crises. They have even been abject failures as peacekeepers. In fact, the only thing the UN has managed to achieve is a track record on arcane agreements and treaties- the work diplomats do best. If the UN really gave a damn about crises resolution, they would have installed a military person with the wherewithal to impose settlements, harshly, if need be- and save lives and prevent the degradation we have seen, in the process.

Those countries that would be against such intervention, would be seen for what they are. And if by consensus, the UN failed to act, well, we would see exactly what the UN really is.

If we saw the direct correlation between UN inaction and the slaughter and rapes in Darfur, the path of action would b equite clear. No never ending diplomacy, no talking, no cocktail parties and haute cuisine dinners while hundreds of thousands are killed or are assaulted.

Imagine a world where 'enough is enough' actually meant something.

The relevance of the UN is not a long term project. It is a short term necessity. If they can't understand that they have to act now to save lives, what good are they?

Put The Blame Where It Belongs- With God

We know our political posts get tiring. We know that isn't why most of you come to SC&A.

We know some of our readers wish we didn't spend so much time on politics. There are many times we agree with you.

Then, we run across an article like this:

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - One medical charity has treated 500 victims of sexual violence in Darfur in four months and this is just a fraction of such attacks in the Sudanese province, a senior U.N. official said on Tuesday...

At least 180,000 people have died from violence, hunger and disease and two million have been driven from their homes.

"We believe this represents only a fraction of the total victims," he said, adding that the impact of the violence was compounded by Sudan's failure to acknowledge the scale of the problem and to act to stop it.

How can this be allowed to go one? How can so many people change the channel and not act? It is common and trite to say 'we' need to do something. 'We' need to hold hands and candles and demonstrate make speeches and sing Kumbaya. 'We' need to write poems and letters and talk about how men are responsible for all the evil in the world. 'We' need to attend lectures and talks, watch videos and include awareness classes in schools and universities. Well, all the letters, poetry, lectures and pink ribbon walkathons haven't been effective at all.

SC&A blame God. That's right- we are going to blame God.

We are beside ourselves with anger. Mothers, daughters and sisters are being raped and brutalized- and we have done nothing about it. Generations have been destroyed and like the Holocaust that preceded this one, we seem to be content to watch it unfold, and care only after the fact. The repercussions of this tragedy will last for generations.

We remember the first time we visited Russia. We left Petersburg and looked out upon the Russian steppes, framed in the beauty of Spring. Our guide informed us that 20 million Russians were killed- whole towns and villages, regions, even- were destroyed, their inhabitants and the millennia of ancestors that preceded them, forgotten.

We will hold back no outrage, no anger and pull no punches. We hold God accountable for reign of tragedy in Darfur- and if He won't do anything about it, than we should. If we can't do something as a moral imperative, perhaps it is time to do something.

Obviously, we have not learned from the past- even the recent past. See this- and then this.

We are Created in His image. It is time we acted on His behalf. Maybe then, we will be able to call ourselves moral.

Maybe it is because we talked to our daughter earlier today, or maybe it is because we had reason to look to consider the blessings of good health, that we decided to write this.

It is apparent God needs our help.

SC&A apologize if we bored you once more. We apologize in advance, for when we write about this again. We just can't get the image of weeping women and little girls, scared and alone, out of our minds.

Sacre Bleu! That, And Bananas!

Waiters in New York are suing a very posh restaurant, 21 Club, claiming they were fired for being 'too French.'

In a civil suit made public on Monday at Manhattan Supreme Court, the three men, Rene Bordet, 68, Jean Claude Lesbre, 63 and Yves Thepault, 68, said the restaurant's management falsely accused them of drinking wine on the job and "created and fostered an environment rife with anti-French sentiment."

It gets better.

Both Bordet and Lesbre worked for 10 years as waiters and floor captains before being fired in 2004 after accusations of drinking on the job. Thepault, who worked for 14 years as a waiter, was fired in 2005 for gross insubordination after an argument with a chef over a hamburger, court papers said.

C'est la vie. The story is here.

More for you to consider:As most of you know (well, Dick Dubin does, anyway), Adolph Hitler was a failed artist. Imagine how he would have felt if he knew his art wasn't up to that of a monkey.

Three paintings by a chimpanzee named Congo were sold at auction in London to an American buyer for a total of $33,853, many times the estimated price.

Nicknamed "the Cezanne of the ape world" Congo turned out more than 400 paintings and drawings under the encouragement of anthropologist Desmond Morris.

Morris championed the theory that chimps had artistic sensibilities and put on a show of Congo's works in the 1950s.

Picasso is said to have had a Congo painting in his studio, in a style described as belonging to "the abstract expressionist school".

The story is here.

Excuse us while we get inspired eating a bunch of bananas. We live for art.

Durbin Memos And Nazis: There Is A History

We haven't seen this anywhere else, but apparently, Dick Durbin's 'misunderstood' remarks were not the first time Mr Durbin used the Nazi analogy. He said in a 2001 memo that 'most of Bush' nominees are nazis.'

According to Fair Judiciary, that is only the tip of the iceberg. Memos quoted by Fair Judiciary also are clear as to why Judge Estrada was to be rejected in part, because he is Hispanic and that had 'energized' the Democrat Party.

Further, Fair Judiciary provides disturbing evidence that in it's own words, states that 'the memos repeatedly make clear that a small collection of extreme left groups... are driving the Democrats agendas and decisions.

Read the memos and accompanying papers. They are eye openers for sure.

The memos were discussed by Byron York, of the National Review. The Wall Street Journal discussed the memos and their aftermath, in a editorial, found here.

There is a fascinating memos timeline, here, provided by CFIF.

By no means are we insinuating that only Democrats engage in such activities- the rot that passes for politics has infested both political parties. Naturally, partisans will decry that and insinuate that their party is virtuous- which only confirms the stupidity (and the propensity for deceit) of the 'true believers,' left and right, those that will do or say anything to push their agenda- even if it's at the expense of the truth.

The Democrats need to chatise and censure Dick Durbin. To avoid doing so is to replay the sorry tale of the Watergate deniers. If they choose to ignore or minimize Durbin's remarks, they, like the Republicans who chose to defend Nixon before them, will be relegated to being marginal voices- minor and irrelevent footnotes.

This case, in it's own way, resembles Watergate- only this time it was the Dems who got caught.

Hopefully, the Dems will now clean house. We don't think they need another Durbin 'nazi' memo.

A Reason To Write, Kim Jong il

It is true that SC&A have been in a bit if a drought, writing wise.

The Anchoress came to the rescue when she excerpted Mark Steyn as quoted on Polipundit. Be sure to read those sites as linked to from The Anchoress.

We thought we would add to Mark Steyn's words with a few bons mots from Ilana Mercer.

Show me a company in the private sector (which is not the recipient of government handouts) that is shielded from bankruptcy. An audit doubtless would reveal that Medicare is insolvent, yet the fact that the taxpayer is forced to bankroll it indefinitely with tax dollars, immunizes the system against fiscal accountability. Medicare, it can be said, is a perfect system of unaccountability. Compounding this, prices of services are pegged at zero. This drives consumers to use the service voraciously, with the result that endemic shortages are built into the system.

Ms Mercer goes on to say,

Medicare is in fact a pit of perverse incentives. It's hard to get kinkier than to make failure tantamount to success. If a hospital consistently underperforms the administration has cause to celebrate. Why? Because it is rewarded with more funds to ostensibly "fix the problem". To underperform is to have your budget increased. With no out-of-pocket payment for the odd slip of the scalpel, the underperformers shoulder little responsibility. The eternally patient or comatose Canadian taxpayer is the one who must pony up for such pooling of risks or insurance. Absent competition, Canadians are trapped in the dilapidated corridors of this national symbol.

In another article, found here, Mercer says,

According to William McArthur, the former chief coroner of British Columbia, for every million Canadians there are 8 CT scanners, against 80 in Japan, 27 in the US and 17 in Portugal. All a mere trifling when you consider the values for which the Kiefer Sutherland-endorsed system stands. These include a plan to extort from cancer patients a Medicare-indemnifying waiver, where the patient acknowledges the danger of being forced to wait indefinitely for cancer treatment. These very values prohibit Canadians from purchasing private health care in Canada. Their tax dollars, however, are seized to purchase private cancer treatment on their behalf in the US. The only other nations to hold such values dear are Cuba and North Korea, so how possibly can we go wrong?

We want to thank the Anchoress for for that mildly swift kick to get us back on track.

Socialized medicine doesn't work, anywhere- unless one considers substandard care 'working.' We can only hope that health care in Canada is better than hair care in North Korea.

Somebody will get that last line.

Being A Prince Is Tougher Than It looks

Women are more afraid of dentists than men. Somebody paid for this research.

The next Emeril?

Think it's so easy to be a prince?

Stuff

You aren't that old. Athletes can be pretty sexy, they say. More records in the offing?

Confiscating assets isn't always a worthwhile endeavor.

Well, you don't have to mow the lawn.

Durbin, Abe Lincoln And The Hated BushHitler

Unless the matter warrants further attention, this will be our last post on Dick Durbin.

SC&A have received a half dozen emails, explaining that our take was on Dick Durbin was incorrect. Our correpondents informed us that what Durbin really meant was entirely different- that he in no way actually meant to denigrate US soldiers, but rather, he wished to draw attention to the problems at Guantanamo Bay.

That's ridiculous.

Is it only supporters of the Administration that have 'misinterpreted' Mr Durbin's remarks? While apologists for Durbin are quick to point out the unfairness Durbin is being subjected to, no one is addressing those who have grabbed on to Durbin's words as gospel, and have gone from BushHitler to even more outrageous claims. Where are Durbin's apologists, working to shut that down? Where is their outrage that Durbin's words are being used by those who took them seriously? Then again, the renewed wild and frenzied calls from the far left to kill Mt Bush don't seem to concern Mr Durbin and his ilk. Of course, they expect no criticism themselves. So what if the Arab world and those that would do us harm are redefining what America really is, with the help of Dick Durbin?

Free speech, you say? Hmm. Does that apply only to the Administrations critics? Seems to be the case. Obviously, it remains unfair to criticize Dick Durbin. Why, some people are hurt and outraged that Durbin be criticized! Imagine- some people are accusing Durbin's critics of attempting to take the focus off his message!

Recently, Bob Geldof said that Mr Bush had done more for Africa than any other American president.

In the spirit of free speech and clarity, we'd like to note that the previous administration was racist and bigoted, for not getting involved in Africa, the way Mr Bush has. In fact, we can safely say that previous administration's racsim and bigotry gave the US a back eye when it came to race relations. Previous US administrations can be compared to apartheid South Africa or Nazi concentration camps that exterminated tens of millions, while Nazi party officials did nothing. The leaders of previous administrations ought to brought before the World Court, found guilty and shot to death. It shames this great country that previous administrations put black Africans at the bottom of the list of foreign policy priorities.

It is even more outrageous that the current administration is under criticism by many, referring to administration officials as Uncle Tom's, Uppity Niggers, or worse. Is history replaying itself? Seems like Abraham Lincoln came under fire by people saying the same things.

Know what we mean? Sure you do! Well, you know what we really mean, so it's OK. Just take it in the same spirit as you would Dick Durbin's remarks.

The Father's Day State Of Mind

Being a father is a state of mind.

Becoming a father was the most gripping experience of my life, and not only because I had to see my daughter die. It was her birth that stunned me most. A little animal fighting its way out - I've always liked animals more than people, and this was so overwhelming. We became animals, the three of us, we roared like beasts, at least mother and child did; I felt a strange kind of sorrow, because I had suddenly found out what I'd been missing all my life.

I firmly believed that somewhere out there, in the world of the living, someone was missing me. There outside the wilderness, I assumed, there had to be someone who thought about me all the time.

Someone who thinks about you all the time, precisely the kind of wishful thinking that marks the child.

It was liberating, I must say, to suddenly be allowed to cast off the royal robe of self-importance.

Read this, here and call or write your dad. He might not have written the words, but they are his.

Motherhood Redefined And Other NYT Social Commentary

What's a nanny really worth? Well, for one Washington 'supermom, ' $75,000 seems to be a fair price. Of course, that would have to be the case,

"She's a surrogate me during the day," Ms. Gabriel said. "I feel very blessed to have her in my life right now. She's the one constant we do have."

So recounts an article in the NYT. Of course, if your nanny or help doesn't have an advanced degree, you just might be shortchanging your kids.

...it is increasingly common for members of her organization to have college and even advanced degrees. Many families now want "someone more professional, who knows child development and child psychology" and is capable of running the household...

Strangely, the NYT cannot seem to make the connection that nannies are now being paid to do what working mothers have to do- divide their time. In addition, nannies are now also to be responsible to manage household duties once reserved for the families involved.

For $75,000 a year, the nanny knows exactly what to say, of course, about her employers:

"They're extremely hands-on with the children," she said. "That's the only way I want it. I don't want to be a paid parent. I want to be a partner."

SC&A are delighted to learn that you can now pay others to assume the responsibilities of creating, sustaining and maintaining a family. Of course, that also means supervising the menu the private chef prepares. Seriously.

After all who knows better than the NYT that familes, love and connecting can in no way account for more than what a $75,000 nanny might be able to contribute.

Dick, Nazis, Niggers and Why We Aren't Getting Along

Kimberly, of Music and Cats, left an interesting comment on the Dick Durbin brouhaha. We wish to republish the comment in it's entirety.

At the risk of being flamed, or bringing down flames on Paul, I refer you to his post (and one of The Good Blogs), which says in part: "Durbin's point, which I think he made very clearly, is that, in the old days, treatment of prisoners like that reported by the FBI agent was only practiced by horrific regimes. That, five years ago, the list of nations one might expect to find practicing such tactics did NOT include the United States. And it didn't include us not because we hadn't thought of it, or hadn't been engaged in life-and-death struggles for our nation's very existence, but because we as a nation chose to be better than that! We used to hold ourselves to a moral standard that we would not treat human beings in ways that we wouldn't treat a dog just because they are bad men, have done bad things, or want to harm us. That was one of the ways we distinguished ourselves from those scum." I agree with Paul that this was the point Durbin was trying to make. I think that Durbin's apology speaks to a sad fact about what passes for political discussion in this country: that people are so inflamed by mere mention of certain words (Nazi or gulag, for example) that, if those words are used in relationship to any idea with which they agree, they become completely unable to parse the sentences in which those words are used. Should Durbin have used those "historical parallels" in his comments? Clearly not... Especially if he wanted his message to be heard. However, it's not happening just on Durbin's side of the aisle/political spectrum.

The Dick Durbin matter, it seems, is a 'misunderstood' tempest in a teapot. Further, we concur that 'overboard' is a part of the entire political landscape.

While we appreciate Kimberly's intention, we disagree wholeheartedly with her own, and Paul's reading of the situation. Firstly, the allegations of torture remain just that- allegations. It is not up to Paul or us to determine their validity. Simply repeating the charges does not make them true.

Let us for the moment, work under the assumption that some of the allegations are true. So what?

That's right, so what? There always have been and always will be, in any large organizational endeavor, individuals who will not play by the rules. That does not mean the entire organization is rife with corruption. If there is a problem, we have a track record of fixing that problem- and Dick Durbin knows it. He attempted to make political hay out of Gitmo, precisely because he could. He just never thought he'd get called on it. Like it or not, this country has a record of self correcting- under any political administration. Durbin didn't give a damn about that reality- he had an agenda. We'll cover that in a bit.

He's a politician- a liar by definition and deed. They all are. Dick Durbin is of no greater moral fabric than Gingrich or Hastert. He, like Teddy Kennedy, Bill Clinton and George Bush are political animals. They are opportunists. They may not have started out that way, but in the end, that is what they became.

Durbin, however, in this instance, is one step lower down the political food chain. He willfully placed himself in that sewage. That said, he is in no position to talk about the stench. He knew his remarks would inspire outrage. He knew his remarks would be cheered by the Al Jazeera's of this world and beyond. Still, Dick Durbin wanted to be a hero- Dick Durbin wanted to 'out Dean' Howard Dean- who in fairness, as the DNC Chair, it is his job to be controversial and to be a lightning rod for criticism.

Why did Dick Durbin do what he did? Why did go over the top? Simple. Dick Durbin is a political elitist. Dick Durbin cannot accept the results of the last two elections. Just as in Europe, where France and Holland voted 'no ' on the EU constitutional referendums, the political elites are outraged at the results of the votes and vow to forge ahead- despite being told not to. They don't give a damn about the message the electorate sent. The people are stupid, the people are foolish and the people have to be shown the right way, say the politicians.

Dick Durbin hoped that he could stir up hatred for the administration among the voters by eliciting images of jack-booted thugs running Guantanimo Bay. It was his hope that the outrage would be so deep as to force the hated administration into heeling to his party line. Dick Durbin was going to show the American people just how stupid they really were for electing George Bush. Durbin's hatred for George Bush- and by extension, the majority of Americans who elected him- is so great, that he wanted them to 'connect the dots,' that by electing George Bush, Americans had voted for an administration that would just as soon turn them into Nazis.

Well, it didn't quite work out that way- because Dick Durbin is seen exactly for what he is, and the annoying fact that there have not been millions of dead left in the streets and there has not been religious persecutions and there are no grand imperial plans to dominate the world.

What Dick Durbin and others fail to understand is that America is not Europe- we consider better ideas as having more merit than better rhetoric. Americans will not tolerate a political elite- and it seems, the Europeans are now sending that same message to their elite. Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite, are not meant to be dispensed by the politicians to the selected few that see things their way- a message Chirac, et al, have forgotten.

Stupid George wants to bring democracy to a troubled region. That has proven to be a tough pill for many to swallow.

Lastly, words do matter.

The truth is, Al Sharpton is really no more than an uppity nigger, trying to get into the big house.

Did that upset you? Why would that upset anyone more than Condaleeza Rice and Clarence Thomas being called Uncle Tom's or uppity niggers? Why is that more offensive that Ralph Nader claiming to have been treated 'like a nigger' last week (To Mr Sharpton's credit, he rightly and sharply chastised Nader)? We are outraged everytime we hear those things but few others seem to be. Plainly said, it is never OK to use such language. Can someone explain why the use of such language is tolerated for only some?

Words do count- so much so that the Washington Post reported today that Amnesty International is trying, scrambling, to find a gulag survivor- any survivor, to agree that Gitmo is indeed a successor to the gulag. So far, their search has proven to be unsuccessful.

We could go on, but you get the point.

Dick Durbin Apologizes, And The Graduates Of The Robert Byrd School Of Caring Elected Officials

Via The Anchoress (with whom we seem to be in synch today), Durbin offers up a sleight of hand apology.

I have learned from my statement that historical parallels can be misused and misunderstood. I sincerely regret if what I said caused anyone to misunderstand my true feelings: our soldiers around the world and their families at home deserve our respect, admiration and total support.

What am I missing? What was said that might possibly be misinterpreted?

Kos, Atrios, et al, clearly understood Durbin- and made sure to loudly proclaim that Durbin was 'on the money' with his Nazi remarks. Is everyone misinterpreting Durbin? While he seems rather concerned that his critics understand that they misunderstood, there are no words for is supporters- who, as we said, know and understood exactly what he said- and applauded him for it- and are engaged in an aroused, orgiastic anti American frenzy of gratitude to Durbin.

What he has learned? As he said, "historical parallels can be misused and misunderstood," is an interesting statement. This is news to Mr. Durbin?

It is exactly that problem that fuels racism, anti Semitism, bigotry and hate, Mr. Durbin. Like you , Mr Durbin, the deliberate misuse of words are used to fuel those agendas. The deliberate misuse of words are fueling your supporters, Mr Durbin- where are your words to them? That you are just learning that is either symptomatic of your deceit or stupidity. Your choice, Mr Durbin.

As The Anchoress says, an apology,

"...will not do, Senator. That will not do, Dems. Do the right thing. For once.

Words do matter, as The Anchoress says. Does anyone need to explain to you that the word 'nigger' is a pejorative word, Mr, Durbin? Does anyone need to explain to you that cries of 'Slaughter the Jews!" and "Slaughter the Christians!" emanating from many Mosques are not appropriate? Should we assume you just learned that lesson today?

You have a disease, Mr Durbin, a serious one- that of moral relativity (it is a kind and generous observation- many might be inclined to refer to you as the hypocrite you appear to be). It is people like you that proclaim that they are 'amused' that some people feel the rape of a person is of less importance than the destruction of plants (remember that monument to stupidity?).

Today has been a proud day for Dick Durban. Today is the day he graduated from the Robert Byrd School of Caring Elected Officials- he learned what he can't say publicly. He can, of course, make sure his 'back room boys' know exactly what he believes (and no doubt he will), but he just can't say it publicly anymore.

Nod, nod, wink wink.

Run, Dick, Run

Dick Durban is a standard issue, self serving politician, who will leave no real legacy. That said, we may owe Mr Durbin a measure of gratitude, for he may also be the canary in the coal mine, warning us of a political virus that is in the air.

Mr Durbin has fired the opening salvo in what may ultimately prove to be the next civil war, of a sort- between that of the political elites, and ‘we the people.’ Like the liberal European politicians of France and Holland ignoring the voice of the people, in a weak and vain attempt to salvage an EU ’of their image,’ American politicians like Dick Durbin no longer hide their disdain for the ordinary citizen. Dick Durbin has to think for Americans, because in his eyes, we are incapable of thinking for ourselves. If Dick Durbin says Americans at Guantanimo Bay are Nazis, it must be so. It is irrelevant if that is true or not. If saying so serves a greater good (and Dick Durban seems to be the authority on that), well, truth is an optional. In Mr. Durbin’s defense, the idea is not his own, It has been used by Lenin, Stalin, the Arab world and Michael Moore. Deceit is now an acceptable form of political expression.

If the American population doesn’t see things the way the Dick Durbin’s and Amnesty International’s do, well, then it becomes clear the Americans who disagree are somehow flawed and are thus irrelevant- and those Americans cannot be trusted to make the right decisions. They are politically irrelevant and they must not be allowed influence.

Why is this so important to the Dick Durbin’s and Amnesty’s? Because they cannot abide by the results of a freely held election.

Elections are more than the results of numbers of ballots cast for one candidate or another. Elections are also about ideas- and often, elections reflect the will of the voters to teach the other side a lesson. Think that isn’t so? Look back at Congress and how agenda based votes are used to ‘beat’ one side or another. Look back at the last presidential election, and how John Edwards was unable to carry his own state, North Carolina, because he was reviled there.

Dick Durbin and others cannot abide by the result of the elections- and they are intent on reversing the voice of the people in the same way French and Dutch politicians are intent on doing the same after the EU Constitution referendums in those countries were lost. For Dick Durbin and Amnesty, if it means lying to negate the choice and voice of the people, so be it. Americans who don’t see things their way are ‘stupid’ or brainwashed. They are religious freaks or bigoted racists.

It seems Dick Durbin et al, are the new elitists. So much for them speaking for the little guy.

Is Dick Durban a worthy successor to Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln? Do he and his ilk represent the best of what this country stands for? We think not.

Dick Durbin is wrapping himself in an insulated cocoon of self deceit. Notwithstanding his ideas, in the end, when an electorate speaks, to endorse a candidate, ideology or policy, the best way to promote an idea is to engage your opposition with ideas- not vilify him.

Run, Dick, run. Sooner or later the truth will catch up with you.

See this and this, at the The Anchoress, for an excellent overview of Durbin's descent into irrelevance.. To see justy how deep the rot goes, see this.

Dissent, honorable and well intended, is patriotic. Stupidity, maliciously applied, is not. It is, and will always be, stupidity.

Dick Durbin, Auschwitz and Politics

SC&A remain outraged.

Senator Dick Durbin's idiotic remarks comparing the US detention center at Guantanimo Bay to the Nazi death camps, the Gulag and Pol Pot's atrocities are an indicator of just how stupid Durbin is.

Mr Durbin obviously no idea of what he's talking about. Normally, that would not be a surprise coming from a US Congressperson. After all, he works in a place that lionizes thieves and venerates ex KKK recruiters and leaders. Still Durbin's words are a new low.

A few days after the Congress formally denounced lynchings, Durbin has the audacity to make his outrageous claims- claims that are so devoid of reality as to be more akin to statements of alien abductions.

No wonder it took Congress so long to address the lynching matter- after hundereds of attempts at filibustering the matter. The place is swarming with liars, theives and other lower forms. In other words, Durbin is right at home.

Durbin's remarks have been a joy to Al Jazeera and the Arab world, joyfully pointing fingers at the US and her allies (despite most arabs having become 'expert' Holocaust deniers) and this encouraging a Jihad against Infidels (that means you too, politics notwithstanding. You didn't really think that your politics makes you an exception, did you- you're not that stupid, are you?) Dick Durbin like most ill informed idiots, throws the word 'Nazi' around as if it were to him alone to define evil. He has no idea as to what 'evil' is. In his mind, anyone who disagrees with him is 'evil.'

Think there is some truth to what Durbin said about Americans running the detention center at Guantanimo Bay? Think there is some merit to Amnesty's position about the US running a gulag? SC&A have been to the Auschwitz death camp.

We strongly urge any of our readers to visit that place when in Europe. We have written about Auschwitz before. In case you forgot, here it is again. Read it. No matter what your politics, Durbin's remarks will disgust you.


My career has afforded me the opportunity to travel- and for that I am very grateful.

I have been to many places and I have seen much natural magnificence- that fantastic tapestry that is the natural world. I have also seen museums, art galleries and even in more humble surroundings, showcases to man's ability to create art and objets d'art, that are truly a testament to that side of ourselves that can create extraordinary expressions of beauty.

I have also been to places that have moved me, deeply, realizing that although myself and those around me have been blessed, there are people and places that are not so fortunate and that trite expression, 'not so fortunate' cannot even begin to describe the chasm between what we know to be true about suffering and what we take for granted.

I have also been to places that can best be described as a gateways to Hell. Those places are so awful, so horrible, that one cannot help but be changed by them.

Auschwitz, in Poland, is one such place.

There will be much written and said today, throught the blogoshere and in the media, about the Wansee Conference, that gathering of evil people who decided, in a very clinical way, that a people were to be exterminated, for no other reason than the fact they existed.

There are many people today, who will write about the Wansee Conference and offer up wise words and ideas of what that all meant.

I will not be one one of them. Instead, I will talk about what I have seen, on my own, in my travels.

No matter how well one thinks they understand the horrors of Aushwitz, no matter how well read on the subject they may be, no matter how many old newsreels and photographs they have been exposed to, nothing- absolutely nothing- can prepare anyone for what they will see

Imagine a large industrial or chemical plant complex. Then, triple or quadruple the size. That is how big the killing factory was. Make no mistake- it was not an internment camp- it was a death factory.

One and a half million Jews perished in that camp alone- of that number, half a million were children under 16 years of age. This is not an exaggeration or calculation. By their own admission and record keeping, those who perpetrated the evil, have told us so. These numbers do not include the millions of Poles and others put to death in Auschwitz.

After a while, you get used to the size of the place. You become numb to what transpired there, as the numbers become even more incomprehensible. The reality of those exhibits and the remnants of real human lives force you to divest yourself from forming an attachment to those lost souls. The mountains of shoes, eyeglasses and even battered old hats become no more than curiosities. It has to be that way, because if it we didn't have that defence mechanism, we would be unable to cope.

There were medical 'experiments' on twins, the 'less than perfect' and a host of of others, done in that Place of Darkness. I will not go into that. It was my intent only to remind you of that. Those of you with children, myself included, cannot shut out those sounds, that still resonate in the silence. It is the most terrible sound I have ever heard.

The Russian steppes are places of magnificent natural beauty. On those steppes, 20 to 30 million (no one really knows) people were killed. They were killed because they were in the way. There are whole towns and villages, that once existed, that are now gone. The towns, villages, and the inhabitants are all forgetten, never to be remembered, by anyone. They were killed not because of who they were, but rather, because they were in the way- by the same people with the ideologies that casually decided that a whole group of people were to be exterminated.

It wasn't just Jews that were singled out for extermination. Gypsies, homosexuals and the mentally ill were all 'inferior' or 'depraved- and thus were to be eliminated as well, with equal zeal. The difference was that the perpetrators of these crimes chose to publicly single out the Jews- the scapegoats of those who offer nothing but evil, throught history.

Late last night, I had a converstaion with a friend. We talked about the similiarities and differences that people share. We talked about values- those universal ideals that are not tainted by ideologies. The best of those ideals are what bind us all together, in families, societies and cultures. We may speak different languages, eat different foods and listen to different music, but in the end, there are noble ideas that are universal and help us live up to our potential. To abandon those ideals is to embrace evil and indifference.

There have been killing fields the world over- Cambodia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda and Darfur, just to name a few. We have allowed that to happen, comfortable in our existance and far removed from those tragedies. We are happy being blind.

Post Holocaust, is that blindness the legacy of Christianity?

In the Middle East, whole cultures and societies that had nothing to do with the Holocaust, embrace the evil doers and celebrate their crimes. They, who should have the moral superiority to chatise the Christian world for our inaction and self imposed distance, choose to identify with evil- so much so, that they teach it in schools and echo the hatred in political and religious milieus. We see the celebration of murder and evil on a scale heretofore unprecedented. We hear it daily and say nothing. We have this need to 'negotiate,' it seems, with evil. We cannot seem to take a stand. History repeats itself.

Regardless of the politics, can we really say that societies and cultures that willingly and publicly embrace that evil are moral equivalents? They are not. We must address that reality. We cannot allow that to enter the geo-politcal debate. Left unchecked, that evil will eventually manifest itself.

I visited Auschwitz on a rainy day, the ground soaked and soft underfoot. The grass smelled sweet, fresh and inviting. I remember quite clearly, the sucking sound of my shoes in the mud. It was as if I were being tempted to focus on something else- anything that would take my mind off of the Place of Darkness.

I remember looking down at my now muddy shoes. For a moment- a very long moment, the grass was red.

Gone Fishin'

Due to matters of a technical nature, SC&A will not be posting today. Regular programming will resume tomorrow.

Yup, we're headed out of town for the day. They will pay- and pay us well.

Help! That Time Is Upon Us

SC&A are looking for some advice. Our 16 year old daughter has been asked out on a date, to a junior prom. To be clear, she has been asked out by a boy.

This would be her first real date. Father's do not like first real dates. Fathers do not like most young boys. Father's especially do not like boys that want to date their daughter.

Daughter attends a private girls school, and she is an A student. Up to this point, her interest in boys has been limited. Apparently, that has changed. Inasmuch as we have not yet examined the convent on an inaccessible island in a Norwegian fjord, we are resigned to her growing up.

Our daughter will be part of a group, chaperoned, of course. We know the boy's family and we have assembled a team of volunteers, should we need to administer extreme punishment to the boy or his family.

Fathers of daughters do that kind of thing for each other.

OK, now for the advice part. What time is a reasonable curfew? And is there anything we have left out? Is there anything we need to consider? Will we ever be able to sleep again?

Time To Improve The Gene Pool

Some people make bad choices, and some people make really bad choices.

A German lottery winner who blew all his winnings decided he was better off supplementing his income as a thief than claiming welfare benefits, a court in the central town of Meiningen said on Tuesday.

Read it all here. If the person in this story is related to you, please do not tell us.

You Laugh A Little, You Cry A Little

"Up for a hike, NG?"

"Write about the things you know"

"In 3 weeks, Rosemary will be a killer"

"Well, we have to be sensitive to 'cultural differences"

Quit Yer Phoney Bitchin,' Bob

Michele posted a question, asking about Bob Geldof's demand that Ebay stop auctions for Live 8 concert tickets.

Tickets for the concert were a hot item on eBay until activists wrecked auctions and Geldof blasted ticket sales as profiteering from misery...Tickets were allocated Monday via an SMS lottery. More than 2 million text messages were entered, at a cost of 1.5 pounds ($2.70) each, to join the lottery for 133,000 tickets...

"What eBay are doing is profiteering on the backs of the impoverished," Geldof said in a statement quoted by Reuters... The people who are selling these tickets on websites are miserable wretches who are capitalising on people's misery."

[Michele asks]Do you agree with Geldof that individual profit should not be made from these tickets or do you believe that each person has the right to do whatever they want with their winning ticket, including selling it?

Since when does Bob Geldof have the right to determine what is and isn't appropriate behavior with tickets he sold? His job was to sell tickets. Congratulations, Bob, you sold the tickets.

Now quit yer bitchin.' Do your job and make the show a success and raise awareness for the poor.

Speaking of raising awareness, Bob, we've noticed that YOU eat rather well and in restaurants often- and order fine and expensive wines, to boot. We also have noticed that you live in an obscenely expensive home, Bob- what's up with that? And how much did it cost you to furnish that home, Bob? We see all those cars, limos and drivers, Bob. What do you think the homeless would have to say about the obscene amount of money you spend on yourself, parties and vacations?

One more thing Bob. Since your such a good friend of the little guy, how about getting all those rich friends of yours that live in Malibu, to get off their high horse and allow the public access to what are public beaches? How can you, Bob, in good conscience, allow yourself to be seen in the same company as those Hollywood types like yourself, that discriminate against minoroties and everyone else that just wants to enjoy a day at the beach that their hard earned tax money helps maintain?

C'mon Bob, show us you really care!

While We Write, Some Appetizers

We're glad we met NG in the cold of winter!

Ripped off and in the dark.

Sean Penn. Hey, you're going to click on this, so don't blame us.

And lastly, we're going to give you a heads on the future of politics.

You heard it here first. You heard it here first.

The Temple of Shoes- The NG Saga Continues

After narrowly avoiding a designer food grand mal seizure with a potent dose of hot dogs, we increased our distance from the man bag convention and our good health was restored.

NG, too, needed a 'fix,' and the shoe store was just what the doctor (Scholl?) ordered.

We entered the Temple of Shoes and NG was immediately transfixed. We knew it was going to be a long day, but it was better then making ass ice angels in front of City Hall.

We were in awe as NG inspected hundreds of pairs of shoes, waving those she didn't care for much like Marie Antoinette might have dismissed a bourgeois pastry tray.

We had no idea there were that many varieties of black shoes. There were hundreds of them. Maybe more than hundreds. What we thought were identical were obviously not, and that annoyed NG a great deal- that we were unable to discern a difference in shoe polish gloss. There are all kinds of 'shiny,' and it might be best if we learned the difference. We saw that NG was getting agitated. How was she to make a shoe decision in only two to three hours? We could not answer that ourselves.

The perfect hostess that she is, NG inquired as to what we thought about a given pair of shoes and for a while, pretended to seem interested in our opinion (our 'opinion' was always the same: 'Those are nice'). We knew better of course- we had made the grave error of asking, "Don't they all start to look the same after a while?" At that query, NG looked at us as if we were third graders.

After an hour and a half we decided that NG was better to converse with man bagged salesperson, Gianni del Chooboqse, who, in the course of conversation, we learned felt fulfilled selling 'shoes- jewelry to the feet.' as he put it. We went off to the side and mastered every game our cellphone had to offer, and set new personal bests for cell phone Donkey Kong and Tetris. We played with the calculator and the foreign exchange calculators. We are ready for our trip to Pago Pago.

We checked the time and realized we were going to have to leave if we were going to be at a particular place, with another surprise for NG. We wanted to be at that special place for another reason. We had dinner reservations nearby, at a fine dining, check-your-man-bag- at the door place, that served portions larger than what might come out of an Easy Bake oven. We were taking no chances.

Of course, NG knew none of that, and given her mighty task at hand, never would. Gianni del Chooboqse was working as if the Crown Jewels were his responsibility.

We didn't want to break the mood that we created for ourselves, but NG was going to have to select her prize soon from the selection of identical, er, similar but not the same shoes, if we were to get to the next surprise.

We looked at NG lovingly- and then focused on Del Chooboqse. It was him or us

Fill 'Er Up, We're Going back To School

Every now and then you run across a political blog that educates as well as influences your opinions and ideas. That is no small matter- most political blogs want to lead you down the garden path- and the less thinking you do, the better.

No Oil for Pacifist's is not that kind of blog. Carl, the author, makes no pretense of wanting to be your friend. Nor will he irritate you with mindless 'talking point' type rhetoric. Instead, Carl wants you to think. That makes his blog unique, in many ways. Nothing is presented on a silver platter and nothing he writes might lead you to believe that reading a particular post will leave you an 'authority' on any subject- and therein lies the blog's strength.

No Oil for Pacifists helps you educate yourself in a political blogosphere that at times, seems intent on keeping you in the dark. That alone makes the blog a must read.

Carl presents his opinions, of course, framed in a clear and logical way. He shares with his readers his own journey to the conclusions he has reached. There are links- and lots of them- but in fact, what sets Carl apart, is that even the plethora of links he offers is presented in a sequence, designed it seems, to help the reader comprehend the matter at hand. The reader is left with a better understanding of the subject matter, even if his conclusions differ from those of the author. Carl presents his arguments in a serious and respectful way and that too, counts for a lot. Pointedly absent are the shrill, loud voices that eschew civil discussion in favor of forced agenda based ideologies, with truth and logic irrelevant nuisances.

The blog discusses politics, of course, but Carl's interests go further. He offers his take on freedom, the judiciary, religion, economics and the environment. No matter the subject under discussion, NOFP offers up cogent and thoughtful ideas and opinions.

Any review of No Oil for Pacifists would be incomplete without referring to the breadth and scope of the research done by the blog's author. Carl seems to spare no effort in that area, and he has an uncanny ability to unearth even the most arcane of sources to reinforce his points. He presents his views, but he never closes down a discussion. He can defend his ideas as well and he appears to take great pains to make sure his sources can bear scrutiny.

No Oil For Pacifists is not a 'quick surf blog.' Equally true is that you have to have the time and inclination to fully benefit from NOFP. A cursory fly by won't work. In reality, it is like going back to school and learning, day after day. We like NOFP and we like Carl as the instructor. You may not always agree with Carl, but you can't say he doesn't present interesting and often provocative arguments.

This isn't bite sized blog bits of tofu- this is a steak of a blog.

When you get right down to it, that isn't a bad thing, all in all.

L’Affaire Fallaci, Part One

(Cross posted on Freedom's Zone)

The Dreyfus Affair, or L’Affaire Dreyfus, was one of the most important events in defining the character of France following the French Revolution and almost a century later, Napoleon Bonaparte. The incident caused a political, social and religious upheaval that was to boil over, bitterly dividing a country that was already divided by it‘s own right and left. The cast of characters included monarchists, republicans, all the political parties, the Catholic Church, an embedded government of apparatchiks and the French army itself.

At it’s center, and what fueled L’Affaire Dreyfus, was anti Semitism.

Alfred Dreyfus was a Jewish army captain that was accused of spying for Germany. There never really was a case against Dreyfus, save for evidence concocted and then presented at his trial- an event held in secret. That he was exonerated more than a decade later is of little import compared to what the effects his case had on French republic.

At the time, it was the French political right that manipulated L’Affaire Dreyfus as persuasive evidence of the Republic’s failures. The newspapers of the right openly attacked the Jews and spoke of ‘secret’ Jewish influence and treachery. The Catholic Church of the time, fanned the flames of anti Semitism and exerted mighty weight and influence on the government and army to prosecute Dreyfus, and to discredit the Jews.

After a dozen years, Dreyfus was exonerated by the French government. One hundred later, the French Army acknowledged that Dreyfus was innocent. It is imperative to underscore the lasting importance of the L’Affaire Dreyfus had on France. Because of that legal and moral debacle, moderate republicans, Radicals and socialists worked together and in 1905, succeeded in passing legislation separating church and state.

L’Affaire Dreyfus is being replayed, with different costumes and different actors. The story is the same, however and the victim in this case is Oriana Fallaci. Ms Fallaci is being sued in Italy for ‘allegedly insulting the Muslim faith.’

And what exactly did she say? Well, Ms Fallaci argues that Europe is turning into an Islamic province or an Islamic colony. In her opinion, there are not two Islam’s- a good one and a bad one. That she says, goes against all reason. There is only one Islam she says- what you see is what you get. SHe bases her findings and conclusions on what is publicly stated and in print.

Never mind that Ms Fallaci is entitled to her own opinions. Let’s examine her accusers and their credibility- and most importantly, what drives them.

We contend that the accusers of Ms Fallaci are of the same duplicitous character as those of Dreyfus, but in truth, even that is not really the issue. What lies at the heart of the matter is that like the French government at the time of Dreyfus, the Italian government has capitulated to what they know is patently false.

As with Dreyfus, what is at the center of L’Affaire Fallaci, is anti Semitism. This time, it is not the Catholic Church left that is the driving force behind the obscene vilification of Jews. This time, it is the Muslim community, cheered on by much of the frenzied left, that have the Jews in their sights. The rest of the left is silent. For them, 'Solidarity', it seems, trumps substance. The same deceit that characterized L’Affaire Dreyfus, is the foundation of L’Affaire Fallaci.

Muslim religious authorities spew anti Semitic hatred to the cheers of believers. Government sponsored and controlled news media offer readers and listeners a never ending parade of ‘experts,’ each testifying to fantastic conspiracies and offering ‘real’ insight into the perfidious religion of the Jews. Arab entertainment media produces hundreds of hours of anti Semitic programming, designed to enthrall and influence viewers (make no mistake about it. If companies pay millions of dollars for 30 second spots during the Super Bowl broadcasts, so as to influence your buying behavior, imagine how much influence hundreds, if not thousands of hours of anti Semitic broadcasts, must have). Saudi imams speak of religiously mandated rape and pillage of non believers. All of this, of course, is broadcast into 'Eurabia' on a daily basis.

Muslim civic groups, in search of credibility, repeat the mantra that it really is about Israel and not the Jews. The moment the realities of Islamic religious and political dogma is repeated, these Muslim civic groups scream ‘racism!’ and bigotry, and the truth be damned. It is into this environment that Oriana Fallaci finds herself.

While the Catholic Church has offered it's own mea culpa's and has come a long way in Catholic Jewish relations, the Muslim community has made no such effort- and from the looks of it, will not make any such effort, soon.

Deceit has long been the preferred house organ of the European Islamic community. Even the most cursory of research illustrates the reality of the Islamic obsession with Jews. There is no attempt to separate Zionism from Judaism- just the opposite, really. No effort is spared in portraying Judaism as the center of all evil- even as they deny in European languages that very truth. Translations of Arabic language news and television programming offered into evidence are of no import to the European left. 'The Jews bring it on themselves' is being replaced with 'Women bring assault on themselves, by dressing provocatively.' Besides the sheer stupidity of a 'blame the victim' mentality, Muslim men, it seems, cannot be trusted to control themselves. By extension it seems, Muslims cannot be held accountable for attacks on Jews and others. That idea is not farfetched. Australia has had had it's share of young Muslim men raping non Muslim women. In court, they contended 'it was our right' to do so.

It is interesting to note that the deceit in itself is not the least problematic for the much of the Muslim community. That deceit has been going on for decades and shows no sign of abatement. It is well embedded, and ingrained and there is no end in sight. Once could argue that the Muslim penchant for self-deceit has been the rot that has degraded the once proud Arab society, but that is another avenue left best explored at another time.

What remains a puzzle however, is how and why the left has embraced this choreographed deceit, so willingly and so openly. What are evident truths, are denied in toto by the left, and the clear deceit is accepted with the same fervor as a UFO believer accepts each episode of the ‘X Files’ as gospel evidence of the existence of aliens and proof of a government conspiracy.

Dreyfus had Emile Zola, the famous French author come to his defense with the scathing ‘J‘Accuse!,’ published in L’Aurore, a French literary newspaper. That article was to reverberations throughout France and Europe. Oriana Fallaci is still waiting for her Zola, to defend her basic rights. No one on the left seems to be too bothered by that.

Part two of L’Affaire Fallaci, will examine why that is so and why it is so important that there must be a confrontation, rather than a polite acquiescence to what is happening.

Hey FATSO!

Another reason to love SC&A.

(To the Tune of Hava Nagilah) Have a potato...

(To the tune of any Kurt Cobain) You just can't catch a break...

SC&A Preemptive Answers

SC&A have been snowed under with work and so we have not been posting as we should. We are working on a piece which will be up tomorrow.

Further, we are behind on other blog related matters, such as On the Couch with SC&A and blog reviews.

Onwards. Because of our work schedule and committments (eating, dining, bathing, scratching, TV, naps, etc) the SC&A and NG saga was abbreviated this weekend. We will make up for it during the week.

On a related matter, we will no longer respond to emails about man bags. We don't care if you like them, aren't sure if you like them, feel they are alright for some guys, want them, feel as if we're being unfair, sexist or metrosexually challenged. If it will irritate you, we are all of the above.

To be clear, we do not wear Speedos, either.

SC&A Announcement

SC& A have deliberately refused to join any blog alliances. We believe that kind of partisan expression is at best, a dubious endeavor and of questionable merit when it comes to actually addressing, understanding and fixing a problem. For the most part, blog alliances are really no more than efforts at ‘preaching to the choir,’ with either a political, religious or particular social agenda being served.

A week ago, we were asked to join an alliance of blogs, called Freedom's Zone. The author of the highly regarded Hyscience had extended that invitation to SC&A. After a week or so of consideration, SC&A have to decided join "Freedom’s Zone.”

Our decision to join this particular alliance has been predicated on the stated aims and goals of the alliance, among which are:

Freedom’s Zone is an international weblog that was founded jointly by Italian and American bloggers. Our purpose is to promote freedom of speech and liberty of conscience through online publishing and by using a post aggregator to promote blogs who share our sense of mission.

We oppose tyranny of all forms and intend to use our combined talents to fight for the persecuted and the oppressed through our keyboards. Our objective is to defend and extend Western civilization and culture, with all it's existing freedoms, for all people of all faiths, from both sides of the political spectrum. We all share the belief that regardless of whatever differences we may have from our individual religious and political world views, we have more in common with one another, than we have differences.

We are greatly encouraged by the fact that many blogs of differing views have Freedom's Zone alliance principles in common.

That reflects accurately our affinity and appreciation for quality discourse, from the left, right and everything in between. We believe our blogroll represents a cross section of voices, all of whom are a credit to the blogosphere, whatever voice or character they choose for themselves.

Lastly, and most importantly, that this blog was recognized by the Freedom's Zone alliance was in no small measure because of our readership. Irrespective of political view or position, our readers continually contribute to cogent, meaningful and respectful dialogue. There is no doubt that our readership is among the best any blogger could hope to find.

If this blog and her readers have provided for a bit of thought and reflection, SC&A has done well, indeed.

More Stuff As We Work On A Big One

Chaos in the classroom. Film at 11:00.

The Dean is accused of plagiarism. Wanna bet they're gonna let it slide?

From the Cumbaya Department: Squeeze me. Or not.

Lastly, if you've ever wanted to be in the Olympics, this may be your chance. You are already in shape for the competition.

Be Careful What You Wish For

We're all for a debate on health care. We only hope that the debate isn't filled with mindless rhetoric and calls for a Canada like universal health care program. From a Toronto Star article:

A study published by Statistics Canada last year showed that the "satisfied with health care" profile of Canadians was lined up quite closely with that of uninsured Americans. "Canadians were in fact more similar to uninsured Americans regarding satisfaction with care," one quotation read, a line that got little coverage in our media when the study was released.

Canada is the only country in the developed world with so much restriction on private health-care — "the North Korean model," some call it — and any suggestion that public funding is perfectly consistent with private provisioning is greeted with suspicion.

SC&A submit the Canada argument be shelved. Just a thought.

Read the whole article here.

"And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them"

As Saddam goes to trial for crimes against humanity, a reminder of why we went to war.

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.

The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.

The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.

The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.

The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we've had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down.

Faced with Saddam's latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.

Eight Arab nations -- Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman -- warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN.

When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.

I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.

I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.

Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq's cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM's chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.

The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.

In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.

Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party's other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.

Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM's effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.

It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.

Prior to the inspection of another site, Iraq actually emptied out the building, removing not just documents but even the furniture and the equipment.

Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all the documents requested by the inspectors. Indeed, we know that Iraq ordered the destruction of weapons-related documents in anticipation of an UNSCOM inspection.

So Iraq has abused its final chance.

As the UNSCOM reports concludes, and again I quote, "Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in the fields of disarmament.

"In light of this experience, and in the absence of full cooperation by Iraq, it must regrettably be recorded again that the commission is not able to conduct the work mandated to it by the Security Council with respect to Iraq's prohibited weapons program."

In short, the inspectors are saying that even if they could stay in Iraq, their work would be a sham.

Saddam's deception has defeated their effectiveness. Instead of the inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors.

This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance.

And so we had to act and act now.

Let me explain why.

First, without a strong inspection system, Iraq would be free to retain and begin to rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in months, not years.

Second, if Saddam can crippled the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community -- led by the United States -- has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday -- make no mistake -- he will use it again as he has in the past.

Third, in halting our air strikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance, not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed. We will not only have allowed Saddam to shatter the inspection system that controls his weapons of mass destruction program; we also will have fatally undercut the fear of force that stops Saddam from acting to gain domination in the region.

That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team -- including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser -- I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq.

They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors.

At the same time, we are delivering a powerful message to Saddam. If you act recklessly, you will pay a heavy price. We acted today because, in the judgment of my military advisers, a swift response would provide the most surprise and the least opportunity for Saddam to prepare.

If we had delayed for even a matter of days from Chairman Butler's report, we would have given Saddam more time to disperse his forces and protect his weapons.

Also, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins this weekend. For us to initiate military action during Ramadan would be profoundly offensive to the Muslim world and, therefore, would damage our relations with Arab countries and the progress we have made in the Middle East.

That is something we wanted very much to avoid without giving Iraq's a month's head start to prepare for potential action against it.

Finally, our allies, including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain, concurred that now is the time to strike. I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses.

So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.

First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens.

The credible threat to use force, and when necessary, the actual use of force, is the surest way to contain Saddam's weapons of mass destruction program, curtail his aggression and prevent another Gulf War.

Second, so long as Iraq remains out of compliance, we will work with the international community to maintain and enforce economic sanctions. Sanctions have cost Saddam more than $120 billion -- resources that would have been used to rebuild his military. The sanctions system allows Iraq to sell oil for food, for medicine, for other humanitarian supplies for the Iraqi people.

We have no quarrel with them. But without the sanctions, we would see the oil-for-food program become oil-for-tanks, resulting in a greater threat to Iraq's neighbors and less food for its people.

The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.

The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently.

The decision to use force is never cost-free. Whenever American forces are placed in harm's way, we risk the loss of life. And while our strikes are focused on Iraq's military capabilities, there will be unintended Iraqi casualties.

Indeed, in the past, Saddam has intentionally placed Iraqi civilians in harm's way in a cynical bid to sway international opinion.

We must be prepared for these realities. At the same time, Saddam should have absolutely no doubt if he lashes out at his neighbors, we will respond forcefully.

Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.

And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.

Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.

Let me close by addressing one other issue. Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down.

But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so.

In the century we're leaving, America has often made the difference between chaos and community, fear and hope. Now, in the new century, we'll have a remarkable opportunity to shape a future more peaceful than the past, but only if we stand strong against the enemies of peace.

Tonight, the United States is doing just that. May God bless and protect the brave men and women who are carrying out this vital mission and their families. And may God bless America.

This is a transcript of a Presidential Address to the Nation, delivered on December 16, 1998.

The remarks were delivered by William Jefferson Clinton.

Saved By The Dogs, Shoes And Us

Our fears of a permanently flat and frozen in place backside was misplaced. Like the intrepid explorers before us, we now know cold. SC&A will take our rightful place with Scott and Amundsen, Byrd and Peary.

After posing for photographs and signing autographs, (well. that might be an exaggeration), we insisted that NG take a break from her cruise director duties and allow us to take charge of an activity or two.

NG pouted a bit, but good sport that she is, agreed. Immediately, we knew what we had to do.

We were off to the races at breakneck speed. We made our way to a recommended hot dog vendor. We had kept the name on a bit of paper in our pocket- a sort of 'in case of emergency' referral. After that four fork full buffet of edible flowers, we were ready.

We told NG that we needed to go to a certain mall, and she immediately perked up. Apparently, there is a shoe store in proximity to the mall she liked. While she fantisized about pumps and flats, we whetted our appetites with thoughts of dogs, sauerkraut and relish.

We ordered 2 large dogs, all beef and all dressed. NG looked at us and sweetly smiled.

We ordered a third dog, all dressed. Maybe edible flowers and sauce quantities in ketchup pack sizes weren't NG's thing, either.

As she ate her dog and we inhaled that first of two dogs, we could sense NG was restless. We were about to learn what 'just looking' meant to NG and shoe stores.

NG was ready to shop. We had no idea what that meant, but we would find out. We had another surprise for NG, but we knew that would have to wait. What we didn't know was just how close we came to throwing in the towel.

NG was going to have to make a choice. We hoped she would choose us, but honestly, we weren't sure.

Slip Slidin' and It's Getting Warmer With NG

In the interest of clarification, SC&A wish to describe 'man bags' and their content.

That usually will include, but is not limited to, cellphone, PDA, wallet (often referred to as a 'clutch), small photo album containing pictures of only the man bag carrier in different athletic endeavors (badminton, synchronized swimming, floral arranging or pro cat walking competitions, etc.), or on memorable shopping excursions, sunscreen of various levels, hand cream, lip gloss, nail files, flat clear nail polish, both day and evening colognes, a sewing kit, and emergency packets of hair mousse.

That, dear readers, is a man bag.

Now, back to NG. We changed clothes (she in the woman's locker room, we in the men's) and got ready for our first daylight public debut.

We needed to change clothing for NG's next event, ice skating.

Before we go any further, in the interest of full disclosure, SC&A do participate in winter sports. We ski, snowboard and enjoy the post event hot tub. We do not ice skate.

NG pirrouetted, jumped and spun, as if she had gossamer wings. We were very, very impressed. She had been skating since she was a little girl, and it showed. She was something to behold, as we and everyone else, watched her.

We spent a lot of time on our ass. Ice is a lot colder on your ass than it is in your glass.

We have new respect for butchers that work in freezers.

When it was over, NG, with that twinkle in her eye, promised to warm us up- she promised- and we were going to collect on that promise.

It may have been cold, but things were looking up- and we had a few surprises of our own in store.

The Tango Begins

How cold was it? Very cold, indeed.

NG of course, took matters into her own hands before the evening ended. We had anticipated meeting the following day, for lunch. We had even had planned a rather pleasant day, after a bit of online research. NG, of course, would have none of that. She was going to be the host, and we were expected to follow along.

We agreed, not having a clue what to expect. With a quick toss of her head and a rather bewitching smile, NG just upped and headed for the revolving doors

We stood in the lobby, not sure what to make of it all. We waited for a few moments as we made sure NG made it to her car, parked right across the street. After she drove off, we headed upstairs and were surprised to find a telephone message from NG, obviously made from her cellphone, just moments before. She had a wonderful time, she said, and she was looking forward to tomorrow.

We were happy, and before long we were fast asleep.

We arose before the scheduled wakeup call, showered and were enjoying a second cup of coffee when NG called. She wanted to inform us of the day's scheduled events. First, we were to visit the art gallery and then have lunch in their private restaurant. There were other, more interesting plans, but that's for later.

We met at the gallery, strolled around and enjoyed a rather pleasant time, looking, observing, asking and simply enjoying our time together. We were getting hungry and we asked NG if lunch was a long way off. She laughed, and told us we had been making our way towards the restaurant and if we were to head through the doors she was pointing to, lunch would be served.

We knew we were in trouble when we approached the m'aitre d'hotel stand and the haughty looking manager gave us the once over. Apparently, he did not approve of NG's choice of luncheon guest. There was an even more ominous sign: the restaurant was festooned with more fresh flowers than a California mortuary. There was a rather effeminate looking man running around the room in a continuous effort at rearranging the flowers. It would seem this fellow was part of the ambiance. He was suitably dressed for the role in jodphurs and a neon pink cowboy shirt- you know, double breasted- and capped off with an animal skin vest. "Ah, bonjour, Ms Michele!" he cried out.

This was going to be an interesting lunch.

We were seated by a waitress in a black vest, white shirt and black pants, covered by an apron. After she recited the speciales du jour, we took our time and perused the menu. We also took the time to survey our surroundings. We thought we had been beamed to a man bag convention, with every other male in the place sporting one. We can report they come in many shapes, colors and fabrics. We felt as if we were voyeurs, looking into a world we knew nothing about. We did learn that there is an unwritten man bag rule- there needs to be antiseptic handiwipes in the bag. There are a lot more Adrian Monks out there than we imagined.

We ordered some nouvelle cuisine, the restaurant specialty, as NG told us. We were hungry.

Too bad for us. The portion sizes would be sufficient to feed a small pet bird, but no more. The plate looked pretty- really, it did. We took our time, but we were still able to dispatch dinner in four half forkfulls. That wasn't going to do.

We said nothing of course, to NG. We also noticed that the man bag crowd barely managed to shove down half of what was on the plate. There might be a correlation between man bags and weight. Scienctists will tell the story, we are sure- providing they don't starve to death, first.

Then, NG announced it was time for our next activity- one that required us to get out of the clothes we were wearing.

All thoughts of hunger vanished.

The Box And Then Some

Where were we? Oh yes, the box.

We weren't sure why NG was so shocked as she gazed at the open box in her hands. Was it because we had lucked out, having made the right choice? Or, was it because she realized we actually listened to her, over the hours and hours we had talked? In truth, it was probably a bit of both.

We had chosen NG's gift carefully. We had selected the perfect strand of pearls. Not just any pearls. We had decided we were going to get NG the best strand of pearls we could find. We did our homework. We were not going to be satisfied with department store pearls or even jewelry store strands. We wanted something special, something that NG would cherish. We asked around, sat down with a jeweler friend and he taught us everything we needed to know about pearls, from nacre to size, and from color to finish. He arranged for us to go directly to a pearl importer and have him help us select the pearls and then strand them himself.

Needless to say, we picked out the finest pearls we could find. After they were strung, we took the box to a wrapping specialist Even the box was to be special.

After looking at the box and it's contents for a few minutes, we asked NG if she wanted help putting the strand on. We suppose she was flustered a bit, as she said, 'no, I can do it.' We just smiled and waited 30 seconds or so as NG realized that we might want to 'help.' We both laughed as as she fumbled her her way into asking us for a bit of help.

The evening seemingly ended on a happy note. That first kiss? Well, that came later on- and with subsequent events that weekend, that first kiss was not guaranteed. Before NG was to leave that evening, there was a real and sudden turn of events- and neither her or I saw it coming.

Lets just say it was cold. It was a very, very cold turn of events.

We hope we're not putting you to sleep.

NG Saga Continues

With some trepidation, SC&A will continue recounting our NG saga. We are of course, highly sensitized and attuned to readers likes and dislikes and will therefore rely on brevity so as not to test our readers patience.

When we last left off, we recounted our sightseeing in NG's city. We ended up in a middle eastern bazaar, replete with hanging goat carcasses and animals of indeterminate origin. The sights, sound and smells were breathtaking.

Did we mention that in addition to NG being the perfect tour guide, she also wears terrific perfume?

Anyway, it was time to leave the souk. We had to bring NG back to her car and then get back to our hotel room. The truth was, we didn't want the evening to end, and we knew NG wasn't in a rush for that to happen, either. It is true we were tired and the hour was late. We didn't want to go anyplace noisy or crowded. I decided to ask NG if she wanted to chat a little longer in the lobby of the hotel. She agreed immediately. When her eyes lit up at that suggestion, we knew we would take that opportunity to give her a gift we had brought along- something very, very, special.

We were going to give her that gift later on- that is, on the second or third day of that first visit. but then and there, we knew it was time for the box. She was to get the box, that night. What was in the box, you ask? We will tell you- later

As it turns out, having a relaxing drink in the lobby of our hotel was the perfect idea. There was a piano player whose last set would end in an hour. The music was mellow, the lobby was quiet and everything was just perfect. We talked, laughed and settled in comfortable chairs and into a rhythm that was our own, the perfect rhythm for us. The conversation went from serious to fun, to joking and everything in between.

And then it happened- and we knew it was time.

We started to talk about the evenings events in terms of us- that is, as a shared experience, the way couples do.

We pulled out the box. NG was absolutely surprised- shocked, actually. She reached for the box, delicately and gingerly. When she opened the box, we saw her eyes and we knew everything changed.

She just stared at what was inside the box and we were just grateful that we had chosen well. We knew the night would not end soon. We knew something had happened- and changed.

As we said, we are sensitive to our readers. More later, if your interest holds.

Shall We Dance?

The weekend is here, and that means the NG/SC&A saga will continue.

That is of course, if our readers our interested. We do so hate to bore you with the details of our story.

The Friday Thinkabout: Sex, Politics And Free Will

This morning, we were asked a question: Did we think legalizing prostitution is a good idea? We answered the question, of course. How we answered is irrelevant for the purposes of this conversation. SC&A will explain why that is so.

Irrespective of what your position is on prostitution, drug use, homosexuality or any other controversial issue, it is now a sad truth that your ideas and beliefs on any of these matters will make you a target for personal criticism and vilification. If your beliefs are in conflict with agenda based or politically correct ideologies du jour, you will be labeled a bigot, racist, homophobe or any of a thousand other names or epithets will be thrown at you.

Of course, this also applies to political thought of all stripes. Notwithstanding the hysterical PC crowds, disagreeing with a particular point of view is not tantamount to treason or sedition.

To disagree with the manipulators of media and culture is to paint a bullseye on one's back. It seems that what is PC to one group or another, is steamrolling everything in it's way. Sadly, those targeted with said bullseye, do not understand they need not be on the defensive.

Media manipulators and their PC storm troopers (those that instantly vilify any of their detractors) must not be allowed to ply their trade with impunity. That applies across the board, right and/or left.

Not agreeing with a particular agenda or point of view is not treason, nor does it merit a scarlet letter. Not agreeing with a point of view is separate and apart from the person himself. If your beliefs invalidate you as person, you are being victimized by the PC storm troopers.

We may have children, siblings or friends who behave in ways we do not approve of. That does not mean we love them any less. We do not have to condone or approve of ideas or behaviors that are different from our own, to accept them.

An individual's choices do not negate the individual. Here's the secret: to see if beliefs or ideas are agendized, look to see if people who hold different beliefs are differentiated from the choices they make.

SC&A want to take this conversation one step further. We want to our readers to think and not react- even when talking about controversial matters. We want to talk about sex- any kind of sex- and talking about sex is not like talking about geometry or astronomy.

When we talk about sex, we are talking about something very subjective. We come to the conversation with the most intimate and personal of ideas and biases. Each of us has a sexual identity that is unique. Some of that identity may be very healthy, some of that identity may be less healthy. We carry the kernels of that sexual identity from childhood, some of it imposed upon us at a young age. Some of allow that sexuality to consume us, others look to subjugate that sexuality. In fact, what suits one person may not suit another. In any case, it is quite clear that any discussion about sexuality usually has certain emotional content. Again, talking about sex is not like talking about mathematics. It is not a simple matter to be objective. It may not even be possible to be objective. What is possible, is an objective conversation recognizing that different beliefs and views regarding sex are the norm- that is to say, one view of sexuality cannot be imposed on a society, culture or one another. Simply having differing views does not negate an individual, culture or society, no matter how much the proponents of a certain agenda want it to be so.

In other words, whether the conversation is about prostitution or homosexuality, for example, opposing views do not negate the individual. One is not evil for having a different view. What is evil are those on either side of an issue that wish to negate and vilify those who disagree with them. What is evil are those that attempt to impose upon others an ideology or set of beliefs that differ from their own. What is evil is the concerted attempt to pit one group against another, in an effort to define 'right' and 'wrong' and thus marginalize one group or another.

What is lost in all this is free will. What is lost is 'live and let live.' What are choices that are of a private nature, need to remain private. Simply making a personal choice is no cause for demanding a public referendum of approval, on a choice that is personal.

The same applies to religion and politics. More on that, later.

Recycled, Reused-Because We Care

Hey, you- yes, YOU- Madonna a favorite of yours? YOU PERVERT.

"Hey, Run Me Over..." Another way of saying, 'Make my day.'

It was either this, or more on Amnesty. Aren't you glad we care?

Hubris, Hypocrisy and Disgust

It seems as if Amnesty International's hubris and hypocrisy knows no bounds. The Anchoress has a post, with links, highlighting Amnesty's call to kidnap senior American officials- including the President, so that they might be investigated and prosecuted.

Before you partisan idiots make even bigger fools of yourselves, dancing with joy at the prospect of 'getting' the guy you dislike so much, remember this: predicated on Amnesty's standards, former President Clinton would be subject to the same treatment. While Amnesty calls for Mr Bush and others to be subject to prosecution for alleged conditions at Guantanimo Bay, countries such as Sudan, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Somalia might take offense at Mr Clinton's actual use of the military in those countries ('terror camps' were bombed in Afghanistan, that turned out to be facilities of our allies, the Pakistanis. Maybe the next Pakistani government might wish to hold Mr Clinton accountable for the deaths incurred on his watch). Further, Mr Bush was not the first American president to attack Saddam Hussein's Iraq. That honor (and it is a rightful honor) belongs to Mr Clinton. As he said at the time,

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

Read the rest of the transcript here. In case you forgot, Mr Clinton made a compelling case. To put it clearly- Mr Bush was not the first US president to make war on an Islamic country. Amnesty makes it clear that Mr Clinton, too, would be subject to their call to kidnap American officials.

Amnesty has never called for the kidnapping and bringing to justice of Saddam Hussein, Somali, Sudanese, Iraqi or Chinese officials. The call for Syrian, Egyptian (they used chemical weapons, too), Libyan or North Korean officials has never been made. There are others, of course, but we only wanted to highlight some of the more well known human rights violators.

That special honor, is reserved for American officials.

The hubris and hypocrisy of Amnesty International is stunning. Read the Anchoress post and follow her links.

Then, think about it. Enough is enough.

Priorities

Has anyone seen Amnesty International?

What the hell is this US Congressman doing?

OK, let's get a grip. The links we posted above were to highlight a point- that in fact, politics as it is practised today, is a vehicle to hide, distort or obfuscate what should be painfully obvious.

See this, written by Boomr (A Lincoln-esque lawyer, born in a log cabin, and by a sad, sad, twist of fate, in a swampy, alligator infested bayou in Louisiana). He writes in 'An Open Letter to a Divided Nation.',

Even the bitterness and struggle surrounding the Civil Rights era of the 1950s and 1960s doesn't truly compare with the stark dichotomy that election results are showing this year...

I truly do not believe that this country is evenly divided into two completely divergent ideological camps. This is not just a personal hope, or a wish, or a pipedream -- I think it is a statistical impossibility for a country of 300 million or so citizens, with 200 million or so eligible voters, to be perfectly split down the middle into two equally sized camps. Even among my friends, who have had similar life experiences and political indoctrination as I've had, we can find a plethora of political differences in only a brief conversation.

OK, you should be getting the point. Boomr, in plain english, carries forward the conversation, in a clear and cogent manner- and even more importantly, he speaks to us, looking to connect and find that middle ground. He doesn't pander- he provokes, and therin lies the merit and the quality of his ideas. He makes you think, and therby engages you. No free lunches.

Read Boomr's letter here (as it was posted on The Barking Dingo) think about what he has to say- and learn something. We did.

Idiot's Guide to SC&A, Second Edition.

A while back, we wrote the Idiot's Guide to Sigmund,Carl and Alfred. If you have not read it yet, please do so now. No, that was not a request.

We have reached the conclusion that a newer, revised edition is in order. Because stupidity is like a virus, so easily spread, we extend our help to those inflicted.

We don't care what you think or feel. If you do not have experience and knowledge on an issue or a track record of real participation in something you opine on, you are an idiot. You are the equivalent of a couch potato, out of shape and drunk on beer, berating a coach or athlete on their knowledge of the game or their personal performance and qualifications. In the interest of gender equality, if you are a woman, then you are the equivalent of a female couch potato, stuffing your face with bon bons and other stupidity enhancing fast food, talking critically of other women's bodies, as you marinate in that calorie laden barrel you have been in for decades. The only thing 'hourglass' means to you is the time between meals.

If you want to sound intelligent, read, study and learn about the matters that interest you. Don't take the word of another politician, Hollywood star or talk show host. They all lie and would piss on you before you were interred.

Don't think you are exempt from our wrath, because you agree or disagree with us from time to time. What you believe is irrelevant. Remember Two Six Shooters and Sacred Cows? Read it again, moron- and think.

Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you are not an idiot. As we have pointed out before, there is a wonderful quote, " The more I know, the less tolerant I am." If you do not learn or study about something you wish to opine on, shut up, or you'll sound like moonbat Barbra Striesand or that right wing nut job, Michael Savage.

Ask any lawyer, doctor, accountant, military man, butcher, baker or candlestick maker to describe himself/herself on the day they started work in their chosen profession, and the same word comes up:Idiot.

It took years of sweat, work and experience to come to understand what it meant and what it took to be successful at their professions. We all come out of school and we think we know it all- and of course. We don't- and that is of our chosen profession. Why on earth would you think anyone would consider your opinions or feelings on a matter of which you know nothing about, to be relevant? Until you actually learn something (from sources other than those parroting stupidity), you will remain an object of derision and irrelevance- and deservedly so.

Here's an SC&A secret to success: be willing to learn. If someone teaches you something, say 'thank you.' Embrace critique, if it comes from an honest broker and an honest place. You can only learn from it- and that means be bettered by it. We have been corrected on more than one occasion by our readers- and we are grateful for it. We have come to see things differently at times, because of our readers- and we have grown.

Well, we either keep this up or go to lunch.

As we said, most of you aren't that important.

An SC&A Reader Opines

A regular SC&A reader, Mango, wrote us concerning our post, On Amnesty, Issues, Agendas and the Hollywood Vote. As usual, Mango hits the nail on the head, and 'gets it.'


Sorry it took so long to get around to reading your post. Work gets in the way of everything...

Every time you say "Get ready to get offended" or some variant... I cringe a second, and then hit the "Go" button.

But, sadly (or not) I usually find myself agreeing with the major points, and wait for the whackos to obsess over some trivial detail. It's quite amusing. You really do draw quite a different crowd than I do. Of course, then you include like 500 links both in the comment section and your post, so I have to read ancillary details for like an hour and a half before I can see where you were coming from.

So, thanks. I really needed to brush up on Amnesty International tonight... really.

I'm not sure who bothers me more, hypocrites or morons. I'm leaning towards hypocrites though. I will do some more research and get back to you.

Like you had mentioned previously, AI's use of the word "gulag" to describe guantanamo is depressing at best. But, like everyone else, they use strong language to draw attention to an issue that many Americans and others would have likely ignored. Seriously, if they had merely condemned the treatment of prisoners on grounds of whatever and avoided the inflammatory language, you (or at least I) would probably not have heard about it, or merely dismissed it as noncontributory whining. But, like the Schiavo case and others, once you cross a line to get attention, it is awfully hard to cross back.

I don't know how much of their hypocrisy is a result of blustering for the media, or true ideological thought. But, an important point should be made. AI is supposed to stand for human rights. Rights that are independent of political whim (emphasis added-ed).

Nobody is ideal. Nobody is perfect.

They need money and access to support their activities, and with that comes political favors that need to be repaid.

I think that is the higher point you were trying to make, or at least the point I took out of it.

It would be nice to have people be true activists.

It would be great to have people actually CARE, without feeling obligated to financial or political pressure.

It doesn't happen anymore.

Truthfully though, I don't think it ever did.

History is written by the winners. History will often gloss over the misdeeds of others, and paint many of those in a positive light. We simply don't have anyone that remembers the days of Abe Lincoln from an objective viewpoint. We only have the remaining newspapers, textbooks, etc.

And maybe Abe was an outlier.

Many of the presidents were wealthy, had wealthy friends, and did many things to help them.

Much like now.

Many of the presidents were painted in a less than favorable light in political cartoons, editorials, etc, etc. The difference between now and then is the increase in availability of information, and the homogenization of political news coverage. News has been grouped into "Liberal" vs. "Conservative", with very few journalists straying from the party line. We are only presented with effectively two points of view. Thoughts on "ideals" or "issues" are already beaten into one of two camps before they even get out to the people.

What is more scary than the lack of individuals willing to tackle "issues" is the willingness of today's slack jawed moron to take news at face value and absolute truth, without doing any independent thought about it.

That is the bigger problem.

From Left Field: You Only THINK You Know Whack Jobs

That's right- you aren't as well rounded as you think you are.

Meet someone who was too left for Chomsky and thinks MoveOn.org is too conservative.

"When I answered by posting a piece by Noam Chomsky I had found online, I found myself suddenly banned from the forum. When I contacted the site moderator, I got a snippy reply that my comments were “insensitive” and “inappropriate.”

Moving right along,

"it became apparent that often what was comfortable for MoveOn was too conservative and too American for me, and what was comfortable for me was too left and too Canadian for MoveOn."

The entire piece, found here, is a read in just how insane one person can be before being committed to an asylum. There is a lot of great stuff there but we want you to read it for yourselves.

Besides a 'bio' that is just a bit too scripted and a bit too perfect, the writer is absolutely clueless as to what is going on in the world. She thinks coordinating with US border authorities to keep terrorists out is a bad idea.

Of course, she plans a career in politics.

On Amnesty, Issues, Agendas And The Hollywood Vote

Anne Bayefsky made one other interesting point in her article,

Did you know that International human-rights organizations, with Amnesty at the helm, have cast the war on terror on one side and protection of human rights on the other. The preferred phraseology in U.N. lingo is “the protection of human rights while countering terrorism.” Mere lip service is paid to the rights violated by terrorism: There are no detailed global reports emanating from Amnesty International on the abominations of terrorists. Searching Amnesty’s website for “terrorism” elicits 25 reports — all on violations by those combating terrorism.

Amnesty goes on to defend itself, of course- not by referring to the actual matter at hand, but rather, by piously touting it's own agenda, ignoring the hypocrisy.

SC&A see the Amnesty matter as symptomatic of other, more significant trends. We shall discuss that now. Pay attention.

It matters little if you consider yourself a liberal or a conservative- at some point, the truth has to considered more than an impediment to pushing a particular moral or political agenda. We have reached a point where the agenda has no become more important than the issue discussed- and those issues and truth be damned.

Everything is now being assigned what we call an 'agenda value.' That is to say, an issues relevence is now decided by the weight it carries pushing a predetermined agenda. The great divide of ideas and ideologies has been set by the players- the politicians and the media, in particular.

Nevertheless, with a bit of reasoned as opposed to reactive thought, this 'great divide' may serve a higher purpose, however uninteded that may have been.

If we consider the nature of the divide and the driving forces behind it, we may perhaps better understand the real issues. Some issues will continue to divide us- not in terms of our value as citizens, but rather in how we look at things. Others issues aren't the national catastrophe that the politicians and media, would have us believe, and still other issues do not divide us at all. They are rather, looking at the same idea from different angles.

For the purposes of this piece, I will state that I will exclude the radical idiots, on both sides of the political landscape (superficial apologies to Howard Dean and Lyndon Larouche). While it is tempting to define those mindless voices, I shall not. We all are a whole lot smarter than most political pundits and the media would have us believe. To paraphrase the Supreme Court definition on pornography, "We know stupidity when we see it."

The issues that have caused this great chasm between Americans and the vitriol they seem to inspire, must be addressed. Simply being dismissive of voices in opposition serves no one- not the country, not our communities and last but not least, not ourselves. The real outrage is that we tolerate this divide, that has been manufactured in the same way that Hollywood makes movies.

While we like to see our candidates and political parties reflective of our views and beliefs, here's a reality check:

Candidates and political parties are the creation of well funded machines, packaged, marketed and put on display. There is nothing 'real' about any candidate or political party today. What we see is Hollywoood, DC. No more, no less.

The R&D department of the political machines do well funded market studies and determine the 'mood' of a particular constituency. If that 'mood' needs a bit of tweaking, well, there's enough money to go round. It isn't pretty, but it's reality.

If that reality isn't apparent, quit reading now, because this piece isn't headed into the fantasy land of self serving political, passionate pleasures. If your response to mainstream politics is of the knee jerk variety or you get your talking points from websites, web organizations or TV commercials, these ideas are well beyond your comprehension. You are, and will remain, irrelevent.

While we cannot avoid the mindless pablum of Hollywood's influence, in the end, bakers need to bake and hatmakers should make hats. Everyone of course is free to express their opinions- and they should. But being influenced by star power is a sad commnetary on the rest of us. What is even more sad is that the political machines attempt to utilize the tactic. Do they think so little of us?

No candidate today, for a variety of reasons, including the PAC's that fund campaigns in the hope of gaining influence or access, can run on real vision, program for change (and thus giving us a better country) or even real conviction. What at times may appear to be convictions may be no more than pandering to a political base or well organized agendas.

There are no longer visionaries that can run on ideas and higher convictions alone. The last President that was able to do that was Lyndon Johnson- and his vision of the Great Society was bitterly opposed by many for no other reason than it upset too many apple carts.

As a wise man once said, "If you want to make an enemy, propose change."

Can you imagine what Terry McAuliffe or Karl Rove would have done to Abraham Lincoln? Jefferson? Teddy Roosevelt? Carville and Matalin would have a field day in todays political environment.

Real change and real progress, from either side of the political spectrum, is both elusive and ethereal.

Candidates today are selected because the political machines that regurgitate winning political campaigns have focused on manipulation our emotions and by specifically not appealing to our real and reasoned sensibilities.

We are reminded of real and legitimate fears, and cajoled into carefully crafted ones, with the intent of presenting the opposing candidate as a potential Benedict Arnold or ready for immediate capitutalion to any of the dark forces we oppose.

Like or not, admit it or not, politics is driven by money (pork), financial considerations and agenda based ideologies.

As we said, there are no Abe Lincolns that can run for office anymore, and there are no Jimmy Stewart portrayals of 'Mr Smith Goes to Washington,' that aren't parodies- and 'we the people' are poorer for it.

In this reality and environment, much has been forgotten.

Liberals have forgotten that our country includes even those who disagree with them and their voices are just as relelvant as theirs. Simply disagreeing with some ideas does not make someone stupid. Belief in God does not make one stupid or evil, or deserving of having the vote taken away from them. They have also forgotten that simply because they wish to define morality, their definitions by extension, must therefore, define us. Life, politics and morality are not zero sum games, that all or nothing proposition. Nor do definitions serve as the means of measure of anyone's worth.

Religious Conservatives have forgotten that 'free will' applies to everyone, and that God places value on everyone. It is not for them decide who is meritorious and who isn't. Nor is it for oner group of people to decide morality for everyone. Morality is and will always be, a personal matter. Further, as disconcerting as it may be to some, God made Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and atheists, as well. These parts of the bigger picture that seems to be forgotten sometimes.

Secular Conservatives have forgotten that 'My country, right or wrong,' is a bumper sticker, not a profound ideology. The Founders placed great import on debate and spirited oppsosition. To simply follow along, without great thought, is antithetical to what this country stands for and values.

Lemmings are hardly the model for political inspiration. Fortunately, the truth prevails, notwithstanding Mr Carville or Mr Rove.

Plenty of Christians voted Mr for Kerry, and plenty of progressives voted for Mr Bush in numbers that are beyond a statistical blip.

That happened because some religious voters recognize a greater spirituality as opposed to a specific set of beliefs, and felt comfortable with their choice. Some secular voters felt comfortable with how things are being handled now. Despite all the packaging, pundits and shrill political voices warning of impending doom, many Americans, quietly reasoned and came to decisions without being influenced and without tearing anyone down.

America was founded and made great by many liberal beliefs and convictions, by people of great conviction, honesty and foresight.

America was was also founded and made great by many conservative values, by people of great conviction, honesty and foresight.

America it seems, also needs it's cowboys, some wearing white hats, some wearing black hats, all interchangeable. It is to this notion that the 'Hollywoodization' of politics was exploited, by the political powers that be.

Elections and issues are now emotional exercises, rather than intellectual ones. As any good Hollywood director knows, 'make 'em laugh or make 'em cry, and you'll sell tickets.'

We are being sold tickets and the studio with the funnier or sadder film, wins.

This cannot continue.

We, as human beings, always look to our inner compass, our belief and value systems. For some, the magnetic North is the church and faith. For others, it is the 'good works,' sans religion, of much Liberal thought and ideology.

Many mouths a day are fed by religious people, and many mouths a day are fed by secularists. To the hungry I think, it matters not.

As a result of the media and the packaging, however, somehow what has become important is who's picture is seen dispensing the food. Each side declares the other's kitchen as infested with disease, and each side manufactures conspiracy dark theories, implying that 'they' really want to poison us all.

Faced with the barrage of orchestrated and contrived crises, we retreat into ourselves, into the boxes that have been provided to us. All too often, we refuse to think outside that box. And the cycle continues.

Not happy reading this? Good. Maybe, just maybe, you'll start thinking for yourselves.

Moral Amnesty?

It seems as if Amnesty International, that non-partisan and unbiased defender of human rights and dignity, acquitted itself rather poorly at the now infamous 2001 UN "World Conference against Racism."

As it happens, Anne Bayefsky recounts,

"As a representative of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists I was about to enter our meeting place along with the president of Amnesty, Irene Khan, when the chief representative of Human Rights Watch, Reed Brody, turned to me in the presence of the others and told me I was not welcome and had to go. Said Brody, to the objection of no one (although I had worked professionally with many of them for years), I represented Jews and therefore could not be trusted to be objective."

Now, Anne Bayefsky is not exactly a lightweight when it comes to human rights, International Affairs and the UN itself. Bayefsky herself wrote this week about the Amnesty brouhaha,

"Amnesty International’s spokesman, William Schulz, responded this past week to criticism of the Soviet “gulag” comparison by saying, “The administration never thinks Amnesty International is absurd when we criticize Cuba, China, North Korea…” In other words, the fact that Amnesty is quoted sometimes means the group should be above criticism always. This is the arrogance of an international human-rights organization — and they are not alone — that for years has operated without serious accountability. How sad that the strengths of a major civil-society organization have been progressively diminished by overreaching, ever-increasing claims of expertise, and an irresponsible belief in their infallibility.

Amnesty is, however, correct in one important respect. For far too long Americans have ceded the language of international human rights to just about everyone else on the planet. The failure to make the case for key elements of American foreign policy in human-rights terms has left the field wide open to the haters of America and of democracy, allowing them to appropriate and subvert the political currency of human rights. Every American kid on campus knows that the local human-rights club is an America-bashing hangout. If they are caring, compassionate, and full of energy to assist their brothers and sisters in all corners of the globe, they have nowhere to go — at least until they take the pledge of non-allegiance. Maybe Amnesty’s absurdity will help sound a long overdue alarm bell.

By the way, Anne Bayefsky gave one of the most important speeches the UN had heard in decades. Read it here (with apologies to Ken Livingstone, who, in all fairness, is for the most part, an idiot).

SC&A, in fairnes and in the interest of full disclosure, are proud to say that we support much of what Amnesty does- they take care of political prisoner's families and attend to their needs, as much as possible. We find that laudable and noteworthy. Nevertheless, we findf their reports on human rights abuses skewed in many instances, as we have noted here and here.

In particular, we question Amnesty's relegation of FGM to the back burner of that organization's priorities. Mona Eltahawy plainly states,

Government statistics in Egypt, my country, estimate that 95 percent of women have been mutilated.

No, this isn't some peculiar tribal anomoly, notwithstanding the statements of many who wish to divert attention away from this tragedy.

There are an estimated 100,000,000 women that have suffered FGM. In case you are wondering who Mona Eltahawny is, see her website, here. If nothing else, she is a breath of fresh air in an otherwise stagnant and stifling environment.

Amnesty? Has anyone seen Amnesty?

Why You Need To Do Laundry And Other Oddities

Housework getting you down? Can't seem to get motivated to do those chores around the house?

Well, someone has over 100,000 reasons why housework pays. Well, there were 100,000 reasons- besides clean clothes.

Here's an idea you might consider if you think your retirement and social security benefits won't go far enough.

Is this a great country, or what?

In the meantime a man with a a homemade sword, a hatchet, a knife, brass knuckles and a bloodied chain saw was welcomed into the US at the Canadian border.

Your tax dollars not at work. In fairness to the US border agents, after seeing the guys picture, we're not sure we'd be suspicious, either.

Idiot Kid, Idiot Parents

All this, via Basil's Blog (which you should be reading, regularly): We got turned on to this story, which led us to this story.

The 17-year-old Bucks County boy charged with having bomb-making equipment in his bedroom and threatening to blow up his school is a Canadian who hates Americans, prosecutors say.

OK, the kid is a whack job, right? Wait, it gets better.

''He had the explosives in his home and the parents didn't know about it,'' said Assistant District Attorney Robert D. James, who is prosecuting the boy. ''We don't want to send that kid back home.''

Shades of Columbine- what kind of idiot parents don't know their kid is stashing explosives in his room?

District Attorney Diane E. Gibbons said police are trying to determine the boy's motive but added, ''He is very unhappy with Americans and would prefer to be in Canada.''

It gets even better!

...police found Biehn's parents to be uncooperative during the search. Gibbons said she could not provide the first name of the boy's mother, but the woman harassed investigators as they searched the house.

''The mother was verbally interfering with the police officers. She said her son should not cooperate. The father was also not cooperative,'' the district attorney said.

We believe the only acceptable reason for parental interference with the police in the execution of their duties, would be to beat the living daylights out of the idiot kid themselves. Sadly, that wasn't the case.

It gets even more better,

Biehn created a Web page on which he posted photos of bomb-making materials displayed in his bedroom.

We bet precious little boy needed his privacy, and mommy and daddy concurred. No wonder they were upset when the BOMB SQUAD had to go through their precious son's room LOOKING FOR BOMBS that mommy and daddy KNEW NOTHING ABOUT.

Read it all here, and someone call Mamacita- quick!

When Is Welfare Too Much Welfare?

Another crisis: welfare payments aren't high enough.

The article is interesting and raises an important question: what is the purpose of welfare? To what standard of living do we have to maintain welfare recipients?

Who should decide?

Of Money, Morals And Meaning

Nowadays, it's 'show me the money.' It used to be, show me what you did with the money, but that got to be an exercise in moral relativism. Too many people understood that what you did with money really spoke to who they really were.

Money itself, is not a bad thing. That is the easy part. The pursuit of money is not so easy to define, because in reality, it is what you do with the money that defines the pursuit of money.

In healthy self expression, money is no more than a tool. How we decide to spend that money on ourselves and on behalf of our community, determines whether or not that 'spiritual' side of us, that part of us which transcends our primal and basal needs, will determine our identity. If we decide to use our money as a way to express our higher selves, money can reflect the best of us. If we use money as an expression of our greedy and shallow needs, well, money will only reflect selfish and self centered ideals.

The choice of what we do with money is just that, a choice. This is an important distinction- there are those who wish to decide for us and take away that choice. In other words, free will is taken from us. The standards du jour are imposed. There is no free will without private property.

Karl Marx wanted to define and divide labor into 'stages,' each with distinct meaning- and each designed to redefine labor into a commodity- to be diverted to a 'greater good.' Free will was no longet the purview of the individual. That idea didn't quite work out the way Marx had hoped.

From a historical perspective, the values and consciousness that man exhibits are derivatives of a spiritual base. The notion of charity, caring and being our 'brothers keepers' stem from a belief that the 'higher self' serves not only to please God, but also serves to satisfy that part of ourselves that revels in the 'right' choices we make that positively impact others.

In other words, it is the series of choices, made over a lifetime, that can elevate us or demean us.

It is not economics that define a man's worth, nor it is the opinion of another, perhaps 'wealthier' that defines a man. It is what you choose in life, with money or time that puts everyone on an even footing with everyone else. The poor man's contribution of his time or money is just as valuable as a rich man's. It is true more money can do more good- but money is not the man- nor does it demean the choices and contributions made by a less well off man.

'Each according to his ability' is an admonition to the rich man, not words of consolation to the poor man.

The decisions and choices in life determine the 'who we are.' What we do for a living serves as no more than a platform for the choices that will come to define us- and in the end, author our legacies.

Marx did get one thing right- there can be universal exchange and confusion. That perfectly describes the moral relativism ascribes all ideas and values of equal merit. There is no evil, there is no wrong, there are no standards. Man has lost the meaning of what sets him apart and has become distanced from his purpose. All purposes are equal.

There is no example of an individual or even a government that can be trusted to make decisions to control what is the common good. None. What has proved to work is the diversity of ideas, from the grass roots level. While the debates may lack elegance, the proof is in the pudding. Capitalism and free will work.

When we make the right choices and do the 'right thing' with money, we reconnect with our higher selves. Sometimes that means making tough choices and unpopular decisions. Nevertheless, our higher selves understand the significance of that in our own lives and for the future.

Imagine There Is No God

Why is it that we can talk about religious doctrine and influence on everything else, as long as that conversation is 'approved'? We asked ourselves that question and others, after reading The Anchoress and Melanie Phillips.

Everyone admired Mother Teresa and her work. Every major city and community has hospitals and social services that are administered by various religious organizations or all denominations. Religious orders and groups are expected to toil away and extend themselves without question or favor.

We can admire the communal work of religious groups and even model social services after those of religious institutions. Yet the moment a religious organization make known their opinion on certain matters, there is indignation and outrage at religious meddling. Apparently, religious groups are held to a higher standard- society cannot tolerate religious input into the conversation on those matters that influence society as a whole. Of course, everyone is welcome to to have an opinion that is critical of religion. Why on earth would actual knowledge of religion or religious doctrine and teachings be a impediment or prerequisite to demanding to be heard? As we said once before,

Don't tell us what you believe or you feel. You are irrelevant to someone who has studied for years and has experience in the field. Have an opinion on religion? That's nice. Are you a theologian? Can you spell Deuteronomy? I didn't think so.

Some religious people are expected to be 'understanding' and tolerate 'artistic' depictions that insult faith and God. Crucifixes in urine, crucifixes smeared with feces are no more than an individuals right to self expression. Christian ideas are subject to ridicule and even hate. Some religious doctrine is openly rejected in college classrooms, subject to 'criticism,' by agenda based educators. There is no pretense to fairness or understanding, no airing of ideas to generate discussions that have spanned centuries of philosophical debate. Our classrooms and culture are replete with angst filled literature and art whose entire theme is one of breaking the shackles of religious faith, or of illustrating the hypocrisy of faith.

Chastise religion at will- yet state the obvious truth that behavior can mitigate the AIDS disaster, for example and you become a homophobic bigot.

Of course, all that only applies to Christians, and to a lesser extent, Jews. Advocate the desecration of the Bible, and it's art. Advocate the desecration of the Quran and it's racism. Talk about the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church and it's symptomatic of the 'rot within.' Talk about the (many, many times) larger sexual abuse of women and children in Islamic countries and we need to sensitize ourselves to 'cultural differences.' Talk about FGM, well, no one cares. Indeed, if Amnesty International really cared (see this and this), the outrage over FGM would drown out every other conversation. Apparently, 100 million mutilated women and children aren't important enough for Amnesty- or anyone else, for that matter. Then again, maybe it's because caring about FGM won't get you on TV or quoted in the NYT.

Imagine a world in which religious people finally 'saw the light' and abandoned their beliefs and behaved in the same manner as their non religious neighbors. Do you think Mother Teresa would have been able to do her work, for decades, before garnering public attention? Do you think hospitals founded by religious orders and groups would have lasted for decades, depending on the largesse of devoted followers rather than government aid? Here's another truth. Religious groups of all stripes feed millions of people a day, all over the world because if they didn't, people would die. The choice has been made- government funded productions of the Vagina Monologues or feeding the poor. Good thing religious institutions are there to pick up the slack.

A while back, if we recall correctly, Maxed Out Mama had a post on 'Women's Studies' programs funded by a university. It was an eye popping post.

In a perfect world, there would be no double standards and no unequal expectations.

Nevertheless, there are unequal standards and there are more than a few expectations in the very flawed world we live in- and we are all the poorer for it.

Melanie Phillips And The Anchoress

Melanie Phillips has posted an interesting article, called The Rape of Justice. In her article, Ms Phillips asks:

Question: when is it assumed that a person is guilty until proven innocent? Answer: when a man is accused by a woman of rape.

The Metropolitan Police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, has ordered a top-level inquiry into the growing discrepancy between the number of rapes that are alleged to have taken place and the number of convictions that result.

Ms Phillips goes on to say,

In fact, in case after case women have made false allegations of rape, sheltering behind the shield of anonymity to destroy the reputations and lives of innocent men.

Further, says Ms Phillips,

The reason so many more rapes are being reported is surely because of the huge campaign by the Home Office to persuade women that male violence against them is routine. And the reason there are fewer convictions is because of the casualisation of sex, in which women get themselves into situations which they may later regret.

The vast majority of rape allegations nowadays are made against lovers or casual partners. In these highly ambiguous circumstances, police officer and juries very reasonably conclude that what actually took place is impossible for anyone else to judge.

We urge you to read the whole article, here.

We decided to write about this after reading The Anchoress post, Act Up Acts Out At Notre Dame Cathedral, an interesting, insightful and personal observation about sex, life and meaning.

I’ve always found it interesting that people who have no intention of following church teaching on chastity will DEMAND that the church change its teaching on condoms. It’s not like they’re actually paying attention to anything the church is saying...

For too many people, the Orgasm is the new Idol. It is the Alpha and Omega of their human experience... Way back when I was a liberal, I thought way too much emphasis was being placed on sex, sexuality and the almighty O...

The whole world has paid a price for it, this rampant, thoughtless, ravenous pursuit of the Almighty Orgasm - deemed more delightful, more worthy, more necessary than God or Family or even Self.

I have lost a beloved brother because of it. He thought he was having a good time, some harmless fun. He instead was killing himself, devaluing and ultimately destroying himself and his essence as a created Creature who had been loved into being. And yes, I’m angry about it. I miss him every day. He bought into the program, and pursued the empty, meaningless and fleeting pleasures that are dangled before the eyes of young gay men as something fine and ecstatic to chase and gain. And it killed him.

...I miss him, and it hurts... I would rather spend the rest of my life tending to his bedside than going to his grave.

But to his grave, I must go.

Her post is not an easy read. Some of what she has to say will give you comfort and some of it will hurt. You may agree with The Anchoress or you may disagree with her entirely.

You may see the connection with Melanie Phillips words, or you may not. You may choose not to make the connection.

We chose to write this post because of comments left by Nat, one of our most insightful readers, left on this post. Her comments- and everyone elses are more than relevant.

Learn, Grasshopper

Just a peek at what's out there.

Policing goes private in London. In our line of work, it is what's left unsaid that counts the most.

Recession is when your neighbour loses his job.
Depression is when you lose your job.
Recovery is when Ralph Nader loses his job.

Congratulations, you are now on your way to becoming an economist.

A practical example of French foreign policy can be found here. Kinds of puts things in perspective.

Who says the search for truth is part of the university experience?

And last but not least, another oppressed group we need to concern ourselves with: professors on sabbatical that spend more than they should. This whining, self absorbed idiot is just what we needed on a rather dull Monday.

Oh, Why Not?

Why not some more from the Politically Incorrect department?

Things aren't so great in Sweden or Norway, when it comes to crime. One professor has the answer. Blame the victim. More here.

Are men animals? Nope, not at all. See this.

We like Politically Incorrect Mondays. A lot.

If you have a story of a Politically Incorrect genre, let us know. We'll move it to a post of ours, or, if you post it yourselves, we'll link to you.

*UPDATE* We Love The Smell Of Political Incorrectness On Mondays

Much has been made over the last week of a study published by the University of Utah, postulating that Jews of Ashekenazic origin are 12%-15% 'smarter' than everyobe else. The researcher, Dr Gregory Cohran is having his work published by Journal of Biosocial Science. To be clear, he and his research colleagues are saying that one group of people is smarter than others. How this happened, say the resesearchers, is natural selection.

Cochran believes that intelligence and genetic diseases that are particular to Jews are directly related. Hes states that the persecution of Jews and their tendency to marry within their own group is the basis for this higher 'intelligence.'

Inasmuch as Jews were excluded from many businesses (e.g., they could not own land or be involved in most trades), they migrated into 'portable' professions, law, medicine, banking and so on. (The image of the Jews as a greedy moneylender is not quite accurate. Save for about half a percent, the monies collected went to the Crown. That's why loan contracts were enforced by the Crown. It was in their best interest). These professions also came in handy as Jews were often subject to banishment from lands which they had settled. Couple that with familial connections (e.g., Jews in France and their cousins in Germany or England), and Jews, out of neccesity, could reestablish themselves and their communities, quickly. This practical application of necessary survival tactics came in handy, on more than one occasion.

SC&A have our own thoughts on the matter.

When successful and smart Jews had families, they married into other successful and smart families. When successful and smart Christians had familes, they married their best and brightest into the Church. 'Be fruitful and multiply' may have resulted in more than a numerical impact.

Further. most Jews were able to read and write in at least two languages from an early age. They needed to know Hebrew, to pray and study and they needed to know the 'language of the land,' especially to succeed in the professions that were open to them.

From the NYT article:

Ashkenazi Jews make up 3 percent of the American population but won 27 percent of its Nobel prizes, and account for more than half of world chess champions. They say that the reason for this unusual record may be that differences in Ashkenazic and northern European I.Q. are not large at the average, where most people fall, but become more noticeable at the extremes; for people with an I.Q. over 140, the proportion is 4 per 1,000 among northern Europeans but 23 per 1,000 with Ashkenazim.

It's nice to start the week with a hugely politically incorrect post, don't you think?

*UPDATE* There really is so much more to consider- and given that this is so politically incorrect, we think an update is certainly in order. With that in mind, here is more food for thought:

About one in seventy Ashkenazi Jews score above 145 on IQ tests.

About one in seven hundred non-Jews scores over 145 on IQ tests.

There are approximately 30 times as many white, non Jewish adults as there are Ashkenazi Jews in the US.

The rough math indicates that 25% of white Americans with IQ's over 145 are Ashkenazi Jews.

How does that play out in the real world? See this. Notice the table- and remember, Jews make up 3% of US population, 2% of voters and (drum roll, please) only .25% of the world population. That's right, one quarter of one percent.

The matter has been discussed before. In awards for scientific achievemnet, Ashkenazi Jews are wildly over represented.

Of course, if there is indeed evidence that Ashkenazi Jews are more intelligent overall, attributable to genetics, with a bit of research, can a 'smart pill' be far behind? Before that question can be or should be answered, there are other questions that should be addressed.

Do any of the cruel persecutions suffered by the Jews might suggest that high intelligence can can generate some resentment and hostility? That question has been asked- and not answered, before- and asked of other over achieving groups as well.

The Magic Begins

As agreed upon, we met in the hotel lobby. We recognized NG from her photo, but that photo did not do her justice. As we said, she looked stunning.

After the initial fumbling and tongue tied first minutes, things settled down and progressed smoothly. Of course, it was as if we were starting over. Rhythm in real life isn't the same as rhythm in cyberspace.

We thought we'd continue to do what worked when we first called NG, so we did wear pants for the occasion of our first meeting. Given the obvious dress code at the restaurant, that was a good decision.

NG looked lovely over that candlelight dinner and the time just flew by. Fine food, fine wine and the good sense not to order any pasta sauce meal made for a most enjoyable meal. After that lovely repast, we went to a dessert/coffee house. We then discovered that NG considers dessert the most important meal of the day and can be very, very indecisive when it comes to making a dessert decision.

So much chocolate, so little time. That, and the fact that NG wanted to impress by only ordering one dessert.

The first kiss, you ask? When was that first kiss? We'll talk about that, later. Like everything else with NG, it was memorable.

We walked around one of the many beaches at the lake and admired a rather large concrete tower, from a distance. That novelty wore off and after 10 minutes, we got into the car and decided to take a bit of a tour, with NG as our guide. We parked and walked around one of the more exotic neighborhoods, taking all the foreign sights and sounds. After an hour of inhaling the scents and sights of a Yemeni outdoor market and slaughterhouse, we decided to leave without tasting the equivalent of goat sushi, proffered by a jovial merchant with fat fingers and a bloody cleaver hanging from his belt. Quite the fashion statement!

It was late- we knew NG needed to get back. Still, we didn't quite want the night to end and from the way NG was behaving, we knew she wasn't ready for the evening to end, either.

It was shortly thereafter, that everything changed.

Everything.

More on that- and that first kiss, later. We'd tell you now, but we are sensitive to your needs. As we said, we hate the thought of boring you.

Winter Warms Up With NG

So you want to know a bit more about NG and us? Still a tad curious?

The phone calls went on for several months, morphing from a scheduled 'event' to just another part of our day- as natural as breathing. The phone calls became a daily occurrence and then, several times a day. It was the most natural thing in the world.

We were in no rush to meet, of course, for a few reasons. Our work schedules were already in place- neither one of us had even considered the possibility of an involved social life, so for a long time, work dominated the balance.

Of course, there was more to it than that. Neither one of us were in a hurry to meet. We wanted to get to know each other without the distraction of physical presence and all that implies. When it was all said and done, we were both rather grateful that we had made that decision. We did take the time to get to know each other within the confines of a no pressure, no stress long distance relationship.

Of course, there had to come a time when we would meet, and we both knew that time was approaching.

With NG, we settled on a date and after what seemed like an interminable wait, the agreed upon date finally came.

We drove to the airport with more than a bit of trepidation. After all, no matter how well we may have been getting along online and on the phone, reality was a whole other deal. We were a bit nervous and after an uneventful flight and even less eventful pass through customs, we set out to meet NG and move forward.

NG did not meet us at the airport, as we had agreed. We rented a vehicle, and drove to a trendy part of town and checked into a rather nice hotel. After a phone call (with NG's heavy breathing- due to nerves), we unpacked and got ready for our first meeting and date. It was indeed, a night to remember.

We don't want to get into too many details, but meeting NG for the first time was something for which we had not prepared. Certainly, the picture NG sent us did not do her justice- at all. She was and is, by any standard of measurement, breathtaking.

There was nothing that could have prepared us for what was to follow.

Well, we suppose that's probably more than you wanted to know. We do so hate to bore you with details.

NG And The Couch, Chapter Three

It turns out that NG never got our emails. That's right, she never got them.

We're getting ahead of ourselves, so we had best go back to events as they happened, in a reasonably chronological order.

After a weekend of not hearing from the owner of many LBD's, we left a comment in response to a post on the following Monday.

We then stepped away from our computer.

When we came back, there was a letter from NG- asking why we hadn't written in response to her last letter on Friday. We then sent her a copy of that letter and the one other we had written. Her response surprised us.

Rather than respond to the letter, NG made it clear, in no uncertain terms, that if she did not respond to an email, we were in no way to conclude that she wasn't interested. We were to always assume that she was not in receipt of our email. Needless to say, we were quite surprised. Of course, we were thrilled to be in receipt of such an email!

In her next missive, NG, suggested we talk, as in on the phone, so as to never, ever, have such a misunderstanding happen again. To be clear, this was not a request- this was a command, from on high.

Naturally, our first phone conversation was special. So special in fact, that I even put on pants for the occasion.

Of course, things took off from there. There is more to the story, of course- including our first meetings and a very, very special car ride.

There is the matter of the ring, but we wouldn't want to bore you.

NG, Past And Present, Chapter Two

A wonderful evening was had by all.

Dinner was wonderful. The menu and the ambiance were perfect and contributed to what can best be described as a near perfect evening. The conversation was scintillating and the humor was fun and sparkling. If the dance floor were a rump roast, it would as soft as the best filet mignon, tenderized by NG's heels. A few dips, a few spins and those black heels were clicking on the floor in rhythm to one of the best live bands in area, Irwin 'Ice Flow' Inuktituk and the Kool Kayakers. There is something about the sound of a sealskin drum stretched out walrus bones.

We danced late into the evening and made it down to the beach and then an early morning breakfast.

We suppose the evening's details bore you, so we'll leave that for now and go back to our history lesson.

As we said, we were writing NG and she was writing back, letters that could best be described as the usual courting dance steps. Our letters were exchanges of curiosity, humor and more serious queries, as we tried to get to know each other.

Then, it happened- and it couldn't have happened at a worse time.

We wrote a long letter- a very long letter, on a Friday afternoon, and waited for a reply.

We waited.

And waited.

And waited.

Friday afternoon turned into Friday evening and then Friday night. Still no response.

We could not understand why there was no response. We wrote again, apologizing in case we had said something offensive- and there was still no reply. We waited late into the night, looking for a reply. Nothing.

We went to bed- and got up many, many times, checking our email. The truth is, we were more than a bit upset. We stayed home on Saturday, hoping for a response. We waited in vain.

By Sunday, we realized that there no response was to be forthcoming. We felt foolish, of course, for allowing ourselves to behave in such a silly manner. We shrugged our shoulders, rolled our eyes and poked fun at ourselves. We wrote a last note to NG. That too, went unanswered.

By Monday, admittedly, we were still upset- but we had moved on, and that was that.

Later on Monday, we got a letter from NG- and she had what to say!

Wanna know more? Stick around.

How NG and SC&A Came To Be

In a comment, we were asked for a primer on the SC&A history with NG. Well, it seems that NG has left an unintelligble version of her reality. We have absolutely NO idea what she is talking about. Here's how it REALLY happened.

One day, a long, long time ago... (yes, that's right), we left an as usual for us, witty comment on a very strange blog- one of the most goody-two-shoes PC blog we had ever seen. Lo and behold! We got an email from the authoress, thanking us for our blindingly brilliant and humoress remarks (naturally). Well, one thing led to another and after a day or two of emails, things started to get interesting. The authoress became interested in us and we began to understand what her blog was all about.

As the weekend approached, IT happened. Everything changed- and not for the better. You see, this story takes an interesting turn. It may be all peaches, cream, mukluks and walrus meat now, but at the time, disaster struck. After that turn of events, the likelihood of NG and SC&A 'becoming an item,' seemed out of the question.

We suppose you want to know more about what went terribly wrong, and how, luckily, things righted themselves. It's a great story. Want to know more? Are you sure?

OK, we're game. Come back later for the next installment.

NG UPDATE

We have arrived in the finally Great And Not So White North. Open toe mukluks are the rage here, and we approve. There is something about fur and feet, don't you think?

We have ordered in and plan on an entertaining evening listening to the cracking sounds of the ice flow, as it breaks apart.

We will of course keep you apprised.

Parent Of The Year Nominee

Imagine- it becomes huge news when a parent does the right thing.

SC&A wish to give notice that no lawyers were hurt or involved in the settlement of this case (with apologies to Boomr and Dingo- who actually ate at Rays.

Sometimes, The Remake Is Better Than The Original

Sometimes, a reinterpretation or redefinition improves upon the original. That can definately be said of the Bird's Eye View take on our post, Schools and God: An SC&A Proposal.

In his post, the Bird's Eye View presents in a clear and cogent manner, the essence of what we were trying to convey- only in a clearer and more concise way.

My daughter's school teaches religion with a relatively light hand. No serious Catholic indoctrination, no memorization of the catechism. About half of the student are Roman Catholic and the rest a typical sample of Silicon Valley, including Hindus, a few Jewish students and at least one Muslim that I know of. Rather than an education in religion, the school provides a high-quality general education in a religious environment. In town, at Boy Scout gatherings, and at school sports events, people frequently comment on how polite the kids from St. Joe's are. These teachers, who are not all Roman Catholics btw, will not accept rudeness, cheating, bullying or other anti-social behavior. The kids do attend a monthly mass, with the non-Catholic students participating as fully as they can, which is generally everything excepting the communion. The kids are involved in local community service projects. Interestingly, world events and issues of cultural morality get discussed in that school from a very balanced perspective. The popular culture and secular/progressive politics of the area cannot be kept out, but the mostly Catholic teachers are able to balance the viewpoints.

Obviously, the Bird's Eye View presented a far better case than we did in conveying our intended message. He goes on to say,

Obviously, things are different at the public school. This is a fine school where the kids are well behaved and respectful (good parents, largely) but in a subtle way, even simple moral issues are uncomfortable for them. They have gone too far in removing overt religious reference from the school, and have become a-religious, unable to include anything that even feels religious, which includes a lot of the moral teachings that are common to both religions and secular societies. A simple moral concept like "honesty", which is as much a secular value as a religious one, is suspected because it is a part of many religiously-inspired moral codes. Talking about morality reminds some people of "church", even if it is not in any way identified with a religion, and that makes the school nervous.

We urge you to read the whole post. It is an excellent take and presentation on more than a few ideas that merit discussion and understanding. As an aside, the author of the Bird's Eye View also publishes The Radical Centrist, a blog we like, don't read or consult enough. That blog can be reached from the Bird's Eye View page.

Take the time, folks. They are both worthy reads.

MOM Has What To Say, And You Had Better Listen

It's time you visited Maxed Out Mama for an update on Darfur.

For a background on how history repeats itself, see this, from AI. Then see, this, from the BBC. Then when you begin to realize how we are coming full circle on Darfur, read this, from PBS Frontline. Here is an excerpt:

"It was just an absolute perverse exercise of developed nations using excuses of sovereignty and nationalism and involvement and self-interest, to argue the way around one of the most fundamental premises: Are these people human? Do you have a capability? Then why aren't you doing something? Why is it that the black Africans sitting there being slaughtered by the thousands get nothing? Why is it when a bunch of white Europeans get slaughtered in Yugoslavia you can't put enough capability in there?

There were more people killed, injured, internally displaced and refugeed in less than a hundred days in Rwanda than the whole of the Yugoslavian six or seven years of problems. I couldn't keep nor reinforce my small force, even feed it, and they were pouring tens of thousands of troops into Yugoslavia and billions of dollars of aid, and they're still doing it. …"

I do not believe that the developed world actually considers Africans, particularly South Saharan Africans, as being total humans. I still feel that they consider them as children, as reactive to extreme emotions, and that sooner or later even the more developed ones you'll have a coup d'etat or something else and they'll go into [mass killings]. Now there's enough examples to prove that, I'm afraid. However, what I find sad is that it's sort of stated as an excuse to not get involved. It's sort of habit. …

The Moral Atheist And His Message

Jeckles Geek Blog has an interesting critique of our post, Schools and God: An SC&A proposal. We found his critique to have merit, mostly because we believe he understood the point of the post- that it was not about religion, but rather, about values. We would encourage you to read his thoughts on the matter.

In his post, Jeckles says:

Let's clear the air. I'm an atheist. Sometimes, I soften that statement by saying that I'm agnostic, but the truth is I don't believe. Sorry. I really am. I've looked hard and long at the concept of god and at various religions. I just don't see it. SC&A implied that secularism/atheism is a religion in its own right. I could not disagree more. If you believe in God, I not only have no problem with that. I envy you. I really do. I know people whose faith is deep and that seems to make them very happy. I do not wish sway anyone from their beliefs. Believe what you want.

We stand by what we wrote, that secularism/atheism is as much a religion as anything else. Their adherents cling to their beliefs with same tenacity as believers. As many believers want to see their beliefs in the public square, secularists, too, want to see their beliefs in the public square.

Now, where Jeckles makes a valid point:

Morals and Religion are not the same. We can all agree on that I think. Why then do morals and religion get all tied together. It is because Morals are not black and white. Oh sure, don't kill, don't steal, don't lie --- those must be universal morals. I think not. I see plenty of killing being done in the name of God or Allah theses days. Is it moral to steal to feed your family. If you knew your mother had one year to live, but she would feel no pain during that time and would die in he sleep. Would you hide that truth from her? Would it be moral?

We agree with Jeckles, that morals and religion are not necessarily the same. Nevertheless, western society is predicated on the Judeo-Christian ethic- an ethic that at times is derived from a morality that is culturally based. This is an important distinction, as Jeckles goes on to say,

No, my friends, morality is not black and white. But if we agreed on Christian Morals, then we could look to the bible, the pastor, the Pope for clarification on these issues. I teach my children morals. My morals. Sometimes I use Jesus as an example. Sometimes the Buddha. Other times I use Cal Ripken or Miguel Tejada.

We take no issue with that. Further, that there are choices involved as to what ethics one can choose from is also part of the Judeo-Christian ethic we refer to. Cal Ripkin and Miguel Tejada as object lessons are fine- but they are no better than religious ethics. It boils down to choice- and religious ethics are as valid as any other, as we said.

There can be no denying that religious values have played a huge role in defining this nation. In fact, it was religious values upon which this nation was founded. Our forefathers chose religious values that elevated man, offering him freedoms theretofore unknown. Were they perfect men? No. Was the nation they founde without flaw? No. Did they create a nation, this altar of freedom, as Lincoln referred to this country, as one that was self correcting and ever bettering itself? Yes, they did- and all that stemmed from religious values that demanded the best of us- and still does.

In the end, Jeckles speaks to the truth- the one truth that predicated this conversation.

...even if we could all agree on the curriculum, they'd screw it up. Remember the New Math? My brother was taught the New Math. Poor guy is thirty years old and cannot do long division.

The schools would be well served to focus on teaching kids Math, English, History. Teach them. Set expectations. Hold them to those expectations. You don't need to teach them about character. You need to demand it. You do not need to teach morality. You do not need to teach Creationism. Hell, you don't need to teach evolution.

Jeckles is absolutely right. If that were being done, there would be no need for this conversation. He knows that- and he recognizes the problem for what it is. It is to his credit that he recognizes that issues aren't creationism vs evolution, but rather, far more important. We are discussing the fabric of our society and culture- and what kind of stitch needs to be used in the mending of this fabric.

Notwithstanding no doubt, Jeckles protests to the contrary, we submit that many people of faith would refer to his ideals as 'righteous.'

Just So Our Outrage Is Clear

Just to make our outrage crystal clear (to borrow a phrase):

"The federal administrative court in the southern city of Karlsruhe ruled on Thursday that a Gambian mother did not have the right to subject her six-year-old daughter to female circumcision or genital mutilation, rejecting the woman's appeal of a lower court ruling."

Thats right. A German court ruled that the issue of a mother wanting to subject her daughter to FGM was a matter of rights. The German court did not rule the act barbarous. The concern was the balance of rights- and in this case, at this time, the rights of the child were deemed more important than the rights of the mother. All this from a German court. Two German courts.

The courts did not dispose of the case, immediately, issuing a summary judgement. The German court found it reasonable that there might be good cause to mutilate an individual. A German lawyer found it reasonable to bring the case in front of a judge.

We suppose at some point, the German courts might deem medical experimentation of human beings acceptable, because the interest of science and public benefit might supersede that of the individual. Deja vu, all over again?

That Germany has the temerity to lecture us on Iraq, Guantanimo or on any other matter of moral import is in reality, nothing more than another rousing chorus of 'Deutschland Uber Alles.'

We are furious. Seriously.

Europe: Out Of Control?

SC&A are all for accomodation of various religions, cultures and ideologies, whenever possible. At some point however, there comes a time when integration into our society and culture has to trump the notion of pluralism.

In a recent german survey of gynocologists,

"...found that 43 percent of the doctors admitted that they had treated circumcised women in their clinics."

How big a problem is FGM?

The United Nations Children's Fund, UNICEF estimates that around two million girls worldwide are forced to undergo genital mutilation each year. The practice, that involves the cutting off the clitoris and other parts of the genitalia, is a tradition in 28 African countries and in some parts of Asia and the Middle East.

But, what's largely been ignored until now is the fact that the practice -- imported by immigrants from those countries -- is also carried out covertly in Europe.

Read the article here. Look at the numbers.

There's more. This article relates how German courts have actually debated whether or not parents can circumcise their daughters.

How important these matters are can be seen here- a horrifying recounting of how allowing certain 'cultural differences' can yield tragic results.

...in our own backyards. young men try to rule their families and neighbors under a macho code drawn partly from Muslim tradition, partly from the violence and porn in the media. Women submit to men, they say. Good girls, good sisters, cover themselves and stay home. Otherwise they are putes, whores, who can be used and abused even if they say no.

We must warn you that the article is a tough one to read. Some of the comments left on the site are beyond our comprehension, as they attempt to deflect attention away from the issues. Notwithstanding respect for other religions, cultures and 'pluralism,' there are some 'values' that will- and must- remain incompatible with our own.

Echos From The School Hallways

Below are remarks from Mamacita, a teacher and author of The Weekly Scheiss. Many of you know her, and if you don’t, you should. We are big fans of hers because she tells it like it is. Mamacita talks about children and education with a passion that comes not from inexperienced idealism- a shallow passion that can easily be replaced with the next obsession- but rather, her passion stems from decades of familiarity and heartfelt comittment, and that passion is deep rooted and is oak tree like in it's steadfastness.

We will, later on today, continue the discussion on values and schools, among other things. There are ideas and thoughts that many of you have presented that have challenged us, piqued our interest and helped us further our understanding of just how important the choices we make about education, really are.

Stream of consciousness, in no particular order. . . . .

Did you all know that in most states, a teacher qualifies for free lunch, and food stamps? I never signed up for anything like that, I just couldn't. . We did get free gov'ment cheese, as Chris Farley would say. We came close to living in a van down by the river, but somehow we managed to survive. After Hub got his teacher's license too, it got easier.

Good teachers deserve higher pay, but that's not why good teachers teach. Good teachers teach because they love it. They walk into a classroom, look at those big eyes and smirky smiley faces and something just clicks. They are exactly where they most want to be. They are making a difference every minute of the day.

Good teachers are firm and fair. They don't put up with any shit, but they cut a lot of slack. They are most of all, consistent. Rules apply to everyone. The SAME rules, and the SAME penalties, and it doesn't make a whit of difference who or what their parents are or have.

Good teachers expect mutual attention: they give the students theirs, and they expect the students to give the teacher likewise.

No amount of money will keep a good teacher in an environment where a small group of parents have control. A bad teacher might stay, but not a good one. A good teacher will put up with an incredible lot from kids, but stupid parents are the bane of the earth.

A former student can walk into a good teacher's classroom twenty years later and know immediately whose it is.

I loved it. I still love it, even though my clientele has aged a bit.

I loved teaching so incredibly much. I taught middle school, mostly. That is a difficult age. Middle school kids are so confused, and so different from each other. Little girls in underoos walking beside little girls in C-cup lingerie, and sharing a birthday. Little boys with soprano voices and smooth necks and faces in Sears Garanimals walking beside little boys who sound like Tennessee Ernie Ford with bristly faces and a big Adam's apple, in boxer-revealing hip hugging cargoes, sharing a birthday.

I used to stand in the hall and watch over them and think, could there BE an age that was more fun to deal with every day? Middle school. Young enough to obey and respect you (usually) and old enough to be able to do almost anything they were asked to do.

Compassionate to the point of tears over a sad story or film. Willing and eager to help. Social and chatty. Still willing to try new things. Still loving to draw and sculpt.

Girls whispering among themselves, and then one of them going over to where one solitary shy girl was sitting alone and inviting her to join their group.

Boys blustering and being silly and tough and then racing over to help somebody's visiting grandmother pick up the contents of a spilled box.

The silly hair. The funny shirts. The baggy pants. The sharing of gym shoes and shorts. The notes.

People like to complain about young people today, and they're right; a lot of young people are creeps and criminals. Just like a lot of old people. If you look for that quality in anyone, you will surely find it, if I may sort of quote Pollyanna. The thing is, a kid is usually only like that if he has a role model who is also like that. Parents, look in the mirror.

(Yes, there are exceptions. Believe me, I know that. )

Sometimes, I despair over the state of our schools. Many of them are crumbling to the ground before our very eyes. My old middle school smelled like a sewage pond most of the time, and there was mold on the classroom walls that seeped through the posters and dissolved them. And it was a fairly new building.

Lowest bidder. You get what you pay for.

But inside any school, there is something that transcends all of that. Inside a school, there are students and teachers, and each needs the other to make sure the world can keep on keeping on.

Look around any classroom. No matter how awful it might be, somewhere in that room is someone who might be removing your appendix in a few years. Someone who might be removing your CHILD'S appendix in a few years. Someone in that room will be designing rockets, and controlling a nuclear reactor plant, and fixing your kitchen sink, and roofing your house. Someone in that rowdy classroom will be taking care of your grandchild all day, and cooking your food in a restaurant, and styling your hair, and removing tumors from your brain.

Students are not riff-raff. They are not 'potential' people. They are full-blown personalities who are on a journey to the great unknown, and the closer they get the more 'known' it becomes. Do not condescend to them. Do not talk down to them. They deserve better than that.

A good teacher finds out what the students are interested in, and shapes a standards-based curriculum around it. It's not hard to do, in spite of the difficulties and stupid tests that must be worked in.

A good teacher doesn't rely completely on a textbook and workbook and pre-written tests. A good teacher takes those things and makes them her/his own, based on the needs and interests of the students.

It should not be hard to be a good teacher. Most teachers have every intention of being a good teacher.

The hard part is not the teaching. The hard part is the peripheries.

The parents. The administration. The rules. The regulations. The restrictions. The constant limitations. The lack of permissions. The false accusations. The kow-towing to money, and the sucking up to community power. The inability to require equalities for all students. Watching the undeserving get, and the deserving not, all because of family. Valedictorians who cheat and plagiarize and have rich parents. Unfair decisions. Invalid assumptions that can cost someone a job. Litigious parents. Constant parental bickering over ridiculous things.

In a school, good teachers don't often last. In a school, it is the lousy teachers, the ones who never make waves or work overtime or make any effort beyond the fundamentals, who last. Teachers who charge high fees to tutor after school last, while the teacher who tutored for free is dismissed.

Parents who insist on special privileges for their child at the expense of all the other children are probably the worst problem we have.

Parents. Parents. Parents. The good ones are the salt of the earth. The stupid ones are Satan.

I honestly believe that good intelligent parents can turn our schools around. Decent intelligent parents are the key. Not athletic parents who red-shirt their kids so they'll be larger and stronger for sports. Not whiny parents who insist that their child be passed along even though the kid did nothing all year. Not sissy parents who blame everybody and everything except the student for the student's failures.

I mean, basic nice people who honestly care about fairness and kindness, and who believe that a public school is the one place where a kid can not hide his talent under a bushel like the homeschoolers do (I'll hear it for that one, sorry) , the one place where students of all sizes, shapes, and colors, come together for a common goal: to become educated, so they might take their place in a society that desperately needs educated citizens if we are ever to dig ourselves out of the dung-heap we seem to have gotten ourselves into these days.

Public school students know more about how the world is made up, than do the private school kids or the homeschooled ones. The world is a big bowl full of many kinds of fruit, not just bananas, not just pears, not just peaches, and not just apples. The world is a big garden made up of many kinds of flowers, not just roses, not just petunias, not just geraniums. The world has many stations, not just MTV and ESPN and porn. The world is a big salad, made up of many kinds of vegetables, not just iceberg lettuce and French dressing.

A good public school will expose your kids to all kinds of people, all kinds of books, all kinds of activities, all kinds of. . . . stuff. If the parents will allow it, that is. Why do so many people fear something that is different?

Parents, parents, parents.

And public schools can do as good a job as the private schools and the GOOD home schooling parents if the general public will just shut the hell up, butt out of some things and come forward and work hard and volunteer and support in others, and let the good teachers do their jobs with support and appreciation. If this happens, the bad teachers will eventually leave and the good teachers will be the majority, and our kids will become educated and artistic and appreciative of it all.

You want values that don't step on anybody's toes? Dream on. I've had parents who tore up the turf because we taught their son to brush his teeth regularly.

However, I think our schools should be teaching, by example, the values of hard work, kindness, sharing, cleanliness, winning, losing, helping, including, playing fair, stretching, reaching HIGH, tolerance for differences but never for cruelty, respect, taking turns, good manners, studying, trying, and a lot of other similar things. There is also value in a little shame. Kid didn't study? Kid is disruptive? Kid won't shut up? Kid won't sit still? Let the consequences rain down on their heads. No matter what kind of religious or non-religious background a family has, aren't these all things that everyone should learn? Political correctness be damned.

Sorry about the rambling. That's what I do best, ramble. That, and be opinionated.

A Size Really Does Matter 911

Send, er, V-Pills to the Canadian posties, immediately. Apparently, they can't quite, er, make it happen.

The newspaper is obviously delivered by a, er, younger person.

Onward, Blogging Soldiers

SC&A were wondering why the supporters of school vouchers tend to look toward parochial schools as being best able to provide their children with the education they believe the public schools cannot.

A good primer on debate in favor of vouchers, can be found here. The argument against school voucher can be found here.

There is more. Did you know that the US Supreme Court approved school vouchers? Here's some background on the SCOTUS decision.

What do Americans think of school vouchers? See CNN here and Zogby, here.

There are more facts here. Here is are a few facts to ponder:

In the following cities, as of 1998, the percentage of public school teachers who send their children to private school are:

Los Angeles - 18.9%
New York - 21.4%
Boston - 24.4%
Miami - 35.4% (3)

According to a July 1996 Department of Education report, 36.2% of private school teachers are "Highly Satisfied" with their work, while 11.2% of public school teachers are.(3)

As of 1998, public school teachers make 52% more than private school teachers.(3)

The NEA membership was the 4th highest contributor to federal candidates and parties in 95-96 election cycle. They contributed $3,283,141 (96% to Democrats, 4% to Republicans). The AFT membership was the 16th highest contributor. They contributed $2,423,088 (99% to Democrats, 1% to Republicans).(9)

Deep Throat- The Jury Is Still Out

Michele posted an interesting question this morning: Would Deep Throat be a hero in 2005?

Some her readers left interesting remarks and that will no doubt be the case throught the day. We thought we'd mention it, because the question is essentially a moral one- and as such, it really is a continuation of of conversation on the same subject.

SC&A have the following to say: We don't know if Deep Throat really is a hero or not. In the end, history will have the final word on that.

We will contribute to the discussion by asking a few question. Mr Felt was second-in-command at the FBI. Should he not have brought his evidence to a Grand Jury, rather than to a reporter? Surely the Democrats would have aided and assisted Mr Felt in pursuing the legal route. Why did he not approach them or the Special Prosecutor? Why did not do what he swore he would? Did he violate his oath to uphold the law?

Some have said that Woodward and Bernstein brougt forth the truth, and therefore ought to be commended. How do we know they brought all the truth to the fore? No one questioned Mr Felt- and it remains unlikely he will be questioned- and as Woodward said this morning, there were other sources as well. Who are those sources? Do we know what agendas were being promoted at the time? Why are the others so afraid to come forward now, so many years after the fact?

Were any other laws broken, and if so, by whom?

Like we said, the jury is still out on this one.

Margaret Mead,The Bible And Getting The Horse To Drink: More On God And Schools

Our post, Schools And God: An SC&A Proposal, generated some interesting, and even heated, comments.

We were a bit dismayed to find that point of our post was lost in maelstrom that followed. With that in mind, we would like to reiterate our actual intent.

As we stated, we see no issue in teaching Creationism in schools, alongside stand Evolutions studies. SC&A are by no means opining on the scientific validity of Creationism. Rather, we are talking about what teaching Creationism means. If you can't get past Creationism vs Science, don't bother to comment. This post- and the original post- is not about pitting Creationism vs Evolution. As Mellie Helen so succintly said,

I suspect the conversation keeps drifting over to the topic of creationism vs. evolution for the very reason that such a discussion side-steps discussing *values*. Perhaps if one's own values, whatever they be, are not rock-solid, then it may be more convenient to latch on to an "issue" and discuss that instead.

Mellie Helen is right. As we stated as a matter of clarification, the post was not about Creationism. Nevertheless, the discussion seemed unable to address the issue at hand. As we posted later in the day, Mango- and later on, John, on his blog, seems to have gotten the point we were trying to make: If by teaching values of faith, we can instill moral values in our kids, we would be better off doing just that. SC&A see no harm in teaching children that there is meaning, purpose and value to life and to underscore the obligation that each of us have to our community. As we said here, we remain inspired by Albert Schweitzer and his beliefs.

There is a single matter that we remarked on yesterday that was not commented on, with the exception of Maxed Out Mama in a post on her blog. We said,

"The argument that the government should not be in the teaching religion business is absurd. Atheism and secularism are as much religions as anything else. There are some religious conservatives that teach hate, you say? Well, there are some atheists and secularists that do exactly the same thing. Why is some ‘hate’ less hateful and more acceptable than others? ...We are not advocating the imposition of a religious agenda anymore than we advocate imposing a secular agenda. We are advocating a moral agenda.

The non moral agenda of secularism hasn’t worked.

Those remarks were not adequately addressed- as stated, the conversation kept being redirected toward the merits of the Evolution vs Creationism debate.

There was also no reponse to continued teaching of much of Margaret Mead's work as 'gospel'- despite much of her work having been so heavily discredited by the academic community . It seems. If we call the bible fiction and much of Margaret Mead's work is referred to as the same, why is Mead's work still taught? Why is the message of Margaret Mead's fiction more important than the message of bible? Why are Margaret Mead's work sacred and inviolate, while the bible's message has come to be regarded as irrelevant by many progressives?This is no small matter, as it goes to PC run wild.

To be clear, as we stated, Mead's message, as taught, boils down to the following," ...that men and women are interchangeable, and that sex roles in particular, can be manipulated, for example, is an outright lie, yet those ideas are taught and promulgated because they fit an agenda."

Further, if we are going to have a discussion in earnest, let's address another truth- that 'Progressiveness' as an end to itself, was first born and then died with the death of the Soviet Union. It turns out that even the great progressives (read: priviledged classes) needed and yearned for meaning in their lives that extensded past a 'progeressive' agenda.

No doubt the conversation will be steered back to Creationism vs Evolution. If that happens, our point has been made: there is a great fear and loathing when it comes to discussing morals. As Mellie Helen said in her comment,

"Perhaps if one's own values, whatever they be, are not rock-solid, then it may be more convenient to latch on to an "issue" and discuss that instead. And if Mom and Dad don't have rock-solid, clearly identifiable values, then the kids will flounder in that arena, and get their values tank filled up by TV, music, media, and all the virtuous guidance poured forth from the school system. Parents: if there's a value problem with our kids? All we need do is look in the mirror.