The Horror of Not Having Insurance: Woman Wears Dead Relative's Dentures

Via the Gateway Pundit: a Democratic congresswoman told a hilarious story about how one of her constituents had no insurance and was therefore forced to wear her dead sister's old dentures. Oh, the humanity.

This is the stuff of some Industrial-era, steampunk satire from 1880s London. Frankly it cracks me up, not because I am a heartless bastard but because it proves that the Democrats will literally say anything, however ridiculous, to make their case. I doubt the anecdote is even true, and if it is true, it is bizarre. Anyone who wears her dead relative's old dentures is a kook, regardless of whether she has health insurance or not.

Do you think she ripped the denture's from her dying sister's mouth, or did she wait until the woman was already dead? I'm surprised Representative Slaughter didn't fill us in on that detail.

Harry Reid Painting With Broad Strokes: "Unemployed Men Are Abusive"

That wondrous assclown Senator Harry Reid of Nevada has struck again.

"Women don't have jobs either, but women aren’t abusive, most of the time," he said. "Men, when they're out of work, tend to become abusive," the majority leader added. "Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed.”

Allow me to dissect this. First, Reid is making a tremendously broad generalization. Second, he is weakening himself along moderate voters by sounding like a paranoid feminist. Third, his comments make the state of Nevada look like a miserable place to live. If you were a senator, would you loudly proclaim that your state's domestic crisis shelters are "full" and that its unemployed men are a pack of abusive bastards!?

Why do politicians say things that are patently untrue, and make up false premises in order to serve their agendas? It is supremely insulting to those of us who actually know what is going on. We have let far too many senators, congressmen, and executive officials get away with this nonsense.

(Digression: NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and other similar organizations are likely cheering all of this alleged abuse, as it gives them a fresh swath of moral high ground on which they can pontificate about the evils of masculinity. Nothing makes feminist, pro-choice Nazis happier than crimes against women. I am willing to bet that they start using Reid's false statements in their promotional/PR materials.)

The Ticking Clock

The Iranian government seems to be preparing itself and its people for war. This is not neccesarily news, as most sane people have seen this coming for years. However, in recent weeks, the agitating of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has become more pronounced. His threats and insinuations against Israel continue to intensify, to the point where he is now openly elaborating on what a potential war might look like, and how battle lines might be drawn. A complacent world can no longer reassure itself that Iran poses no threat to anyone.

Doubtless the recent apparent action by Israel against Hamas is stoking Iran's anger. Israeli agents brazenly took out a hit on a Hamas leader, using European passports to infiltrate a hotel in Dubai where the target was staying. The incident has created a diplomatic mess, but it illustrates Israel's refusal to conduct its own War on Terror by any sort of politically correct rulebook. Israel and Iran are on a collision course, and Israel is clearly not going to blink.

Meanwhile, discussion of a potential conflict remains muted and sparse in the U.S. We continue to call for sanctions and warn that our fuse is running short. This is all well and good, but idle talk had better give way to preparation. What will we do if Israel ends up fighting a multifront war against Iran and its neighbors? What if Iran sees no distinction between Israel and the U.S., and includes our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of its list of potential military targets when things get hot?

The writing is on the wall, and we had best start gearing up for the inevitable. The last thing I want to see is a third front in our current war against Islamic terrorism. However, events are moving rapidly in the direction of armed conflict. We better figure out how we intend to respond.

Back in 2003, some said that Iraq and Iran were equally threatening to world peace, and that any military action against one or the other would still leave us with a net total of one dangerous Islamo-fascist state. It's an interesting line of thinking. Here we are, seven years later, staring down a pissed-off and (possibly) nuclear-armed Iran. Of the "elective wars" that we could have fought, did we choose the right one? Would Saddam Hussein be as much of a threat in 2010 as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? I don't know the answers, but the questions intrigue me.

Tiger's Moment

Today, Tiger Woods shall walk the secular via dolorosa that men ranging from Governor Elliot Spitzer to David Duchovny hath trod. It is the sex scandal admission press conference, an ordeal that has become a staple of American public life and mainstream media coverage.

The SSAPC (we must abbreviate) is a decidedly modern invention. President John F. Kennedy's sexual dalliances were known amongst the White House press corps in the '60s, but back then, dirty secrets were still dirty and, well, secret. There were some thing you just didn't talk about.

Nothing is off the table now, though. What was once the ultimate private act is now the ultimate public act. This is the era of Paris Hilton and "Snooki". Rare is the man who has not seen Kim Kardashian's nethers. In such a climate, airing someone else's sexual baggage is not only common, it is a cottage industry.

So there is no way off the hook. Tiger has to do this. Otherwise, he will never be able to begin the long, slow resuscitation of his personal and professional image. Expect him to express regret, to cry, to make much of the pain he has caused Elin and the kids. Perhaps a therapy session on Oprah's couch is in order.

Mind you, I am not saying that ALL the hubbub surrounding Tiger's issues is neccesarily good or bad. The media coverage of a man's sins seems inherently unethical to me, but then, so does the alternative. Some commentators have raised legitimate points about Tiger's duplicity. This was a man who was hailed for his discipline, would you believe. A world in which Tiger Woods can get away with all of this wouldn't be much better.

But what if our cultural obsession with sex, inherent in today's looming media circus, is part of the problem? Blatant moral relativism has replaced moral principle in the classroom, the home, the newspaper, and even the Church in some cases. Can we really elevate a talented, popular man to such blinding heights of celebrity and, given the world's general lack of sexual mores, expect him not to succumb to temptations like Tiger has? Can we fault the wayward for their disordered appetites when we have instructed them from childhood that nothing is inherently wrong and that sex need only be consensual to be acceptable?

The answer to all of this is formation. Formation that, if it is not religious in nature, should at least instill a more generic sense of restraint, fidelity, and integrity.

Joe the Fickle Plumber

"Joe the Plumber" is blasting John McCain and Sarah Palin, saying that McCain "used him" and "I don't owe him shit".

This is what happens when a populist appeal backfires. McCain made much of the "Joe the Plumber" archetype, and how "Joe" represented the typical American common man. Standing up for the little guy is one thing, but McCain should not have elevated one particular little guy to the national stage as a camapaign prop. To do so was poor politics and poor judgment. If "Joe" decides he wants headlines, a book deal, or a reality TV show, all he has to do is make inflammatory statements. People don't like it when their 15 minutes of fame expire.

The Dems Are Dropping Like Flies...For Now

Numbskull Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island will not be seeking re-election in November 2010.

Neither will Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, who is ahead in the polls but is sick of being part of a do-nothing Congress.

Nor will Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut. Nor will Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.

Clearly, this is because the Democrats know they have infuriated the electorate by failing to save jobs, wasting tax dollars at a tremendous rate, and attempting to foist an unwanted healthcare reform bill upon the country. They want to walk out before they are kicked out.

Self-preservation is more than a small part of this. By refusing to run for re-election, and by distancing themselves from the Obama administration, these fellows can preserve their hopes for making a political comeback one day.

One troubling rumor even sees Patrick Kennedy running against Scott Brown in 2012. Given that he is a whiny, immature carpetbagger/drunkard, I think he would lose...but the prospect of his attempt still makes me sick.

Sarah Palin vs. Family Guy (Or, Liberals Hate Disabled People, Part II)

First Things is reporting on Sarah Palin's response to a Family Guy episode that makes fun of people with Down's syndrome, and in particular, her child.

Family Guy is one of those shows that pretends to be equally offensive to everyone yet always ends up slyly, sarcastically endorsing liberal ideas. The creators of the show are the type of Cheeto-eating, fat-ass Generation Xers who deride anyone who finds their humor offensive as "oversensitive" or "paranoid". They get away with both making political/social statements through their work while simultaneously claiming that they are not doing so and that anyone who takes them seriously is too uptight.

Family Guy sucks, as a show. Occasionally it features a funny moment or two (I laugh at Herbert the Pervert's teeth whistle). However, tangential gag writing, shitty animation, and an overuse of truly obscure pop trivia bog it down severely. (For what it's worth, Fox's King of the Hill is three times as funny and contains actual character development, stronger animation, and surprising thematic depth.)

Anyways, you can chalk this up as yet another example of liberal hatred towards the disabled, the likes of which I cited recently.

It's All About the Tea Party

The recent Tea Party convention, and its keynote address by Sarah Palin, loom large over the national discourse today. I will have more to say later, but I think it's fascinating that the conservative stalwarts of 2008 are now being pushed askew in 2010. Is the country banking hard right all of a sudden?

Orangutuan Picks Colts

I know which team I am putting my money on today. Kutai the Orangutuan, a zoo-dwelling primate in Oregon, has picked the Colts. This hairy, orange little fellow has correctly predicted four out of the last five Superbowl victors.

Snivelling Patrick Kennedy Gets Snarky When His Party Loses

Representative Patrick Kennedy has called Scott Brown's election "a joke". Way to treat your new colleague(who, by the way, outranks you by virtue of his seat in the Upper House).

This is a classless, juvenile display from a spoiled, egotistical little prince who can't stand the fact that his worthless ideology is losing traction in the public eye.

Good Riddance, Paul Kirk

Interim U.S.-Senator Paul Kirk (D-MA) is a Senator no more, and Scott Brown has taken his place. Good riddance, Kirk.

I find it both telling and humorous that nobody came to his final Senate speech, which was about bipartisanship, of all things (as if he knows anything about that particular concept). You would be hard-pressed to find a more boring, career left-wing bureaucrat than this guy. They'll always remember him in D.C. as a guy who sure knew how to clear a room.

Congratulations to Scott Brown, on his swearing in.

Rahm's "Retarded Democrats" Remark

Those loving, caring, social justice-promoting Democrats have shown a real disdain for the mentally handicapped lately. First, there were the pro-abortion propagandists who made posters that depicted fantasy images of Sarah Palin aborting her son Trig, emphasizing the child's Down's syndrome as a major selling point for the wonders of infanticide. Then, there was President Obama's "Special Olympics" remark. Now, liberal guru/White House advisor Rahm Emmanuel is apologizing for referring to some Democratic lawmakers as "retarded".

There is something afoot here. The left wing of the U.S. has promoted and presided over what essentially amounts to an extermination of disabled babies, after all.

Do I believe that Obama, Emmanuel, and lefties of their ilk are intentionally attacking the handicapped with their gaffes? No, because such gaffes are politically dangerous, and a politician stands to lose much by making derisive statements about the disadvantaged. However, perhaps, on a subconscious level, the callousness of America's current attitude towards Down's syndrome children (roughly 90% get aborted) is beginning to filter into public speech. It's an interesting trend, at the very least.

Common Sense Proposals

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Virginia) has outlined some basic proposals that, he maintains, could be enacted to alleviate U.S. economic woes. These are non-inflammatory, essentially apolitical ideas that both Republicans and Democrats can get behind. The outcome would be an enhanced environment for economic growth.

I fear that good stuff like this will be passed up in favor of the usual party-driven, hackneyed, talking point BS that elected officials resort to in times of crisis. Common sense proposals like these would do much for our ailing economy, but will they fall on deaf ears?