Imagine

Imagine, by John Lennon, is among my top picks as one of the worst songs ever, but that’s not because I don’t have a good imagination.

I like to imagine lots of things, but one of my favorites is to imagine how many fewer rapes would be attempted if every potential rapist had to spend time wondering whether or not his intended victim was armed with a handgun.

Or how many would-be muggers would become actual muggers if they knew there was even a 50-50 chance their intended victims were armed. Or how many potential mass shooters would target schools, theaters or shopping malls if they knew their intended victims could respond with deadly force.

Now imagine what would happen if they knew for a certainty that none of their intended victims would be armed. Ever.

 

 

Let’s Do the Maths

“But most of the Syrian refugees are good people who just want to live in peace,” they say.

Well, sure, they are. Let’s say that 99.99% of the 10,000 Syrian refugees that Obama has pledged to admit are good people and 0.01% are terrorists. That would be one terrorist.

If 99.9% are good people and 0.1% are terrorists, that would be 10 terrorists.

If 99% are good people and 1% are terrorists, that would be 100 terrorists.

But Secretary of State John Kerry said we’d be taking up to 200,000 refugees over the next two years.

So…

99.99% good = 20 not so good

99.9% good = 200 not so good

99% good = 2,000 not so good

So you see that the President and the Secretary of State of the United States are cavalierly talking about allowing God-only-knows-how-many potential terrorists access to your workplace, the next sporting event you attend or your child’s school.

Think about that.

Comparing Syrian Refugees to Mary and Joseph is Ludicrous

Yesterday, liberals on social media thought they’d come up with the perfect talking point on the Syrian refugee issue. It was a gift from God. Literally. Straight from the Bible.

It was so perfect that it would shut conservatives (especially those hypocritical Christian conservatives) up for good.  They would bow down and pay homage to their intellectual superiors on the left. Finally.

It started with @owillis.

This, in many variations, was repeated all day on Twitter.

Now what story could he possible be referencing?  Clearly, the story of Mary and Joseph being turned away at the inn in Bethlehem. It’s seasonal. They were turned away from the inn. Perfect, right?

Not really. It actually breaks down pretty quickly on every level for anyone with even a passing familiarity with the story. Mary and Joseph weren’t “seeking refuge,” just a place to stay for the night. They had traveled to Bethlehem in response to a government edict mandating a census be conducted. They planned to return to their home in Nazareth when the census was completed; hence, they were neither homeless nor refugees. The innkeepers in Bethlehem weren’t heartless; there were simply no rooms available.

You’d think that would be the end of that. You would be wrong.

This morning, I was tweeted by someone claiming that what @owillis was tweeting about was really the flight into Egypt. Yeah, that was it. The flight. Into Egypt.

While this is a more apt comparison it couldn’t possibly be the impetus for the original tweet. The easy refutation is that Mary and Joseph weren’t turned away. They entered Egypt and lived there until Joseph received word in a dream that it was safe to return to Nazareth.

The same guy asked, “Are ya really separating Christ’s birth from his exile in Egypt?”

Why, yes. Yes, I am.

The flight into Egypt isn’t a “seasonal” story if you’re thinking of the Christmas season. The fact is, we don’t know exactly when it took place, but it wasn’t from Bethlehem immediately following Jesus’s birth.

Here’s a quick summary of the events following Jesus birth. You can read it for yourself in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

• Jesus is born in Bethlehem.
• Sometime after Jesus birth, the Magi arrive in Jerusalem and inquire as to Jesus’s whereabouts. Matthew 2:1-2
• Jesus is circumcised on the eighth day. Luke 2:21
• Jesus is presented at the temple in Jerusalem. This was following Mary’s “days of purification,” which would have been several weeks. Luke 1:22
• Mary, Joseph and Jesus return to Nazareth. Luke 2:39
• The magi find Jesus at a house, presumably Mary and Joseph’s home in Nazareth. Matthew 2:11
• Joseph warned in a dream that Herod sought to kill Jesus. Mary, Joseph and Jesus flee to Egypt. Matthew 2:13-14
• Herod orders that all male children in and around Bethlehem, two years old and under, are to be slain. Matthew 2:16

So you can see from Matthew 2:16 that at the time of the the flight into Egypt, Jesus could have been anywhere from a few months old up to two years old. So, yes, it’s easily separated from the Christmas story.

At any rate, a family of three is a far cry from the many thousands of refugees the Obama administration proposes to accept over the next year, all of whom will arrive with next to nothing and receive benefits courtesy of American taxpayers.

Also noteworthy is that the vast majority of these refugees are single men, not families. Young men. Some might say fighting-age men. And let me point out that the average age of a suicide bomber is early 20s. (Newsweek, Haaretz, Statistics Brain) I think that’s a legitimate cause for concern.

So I’ve covered every point I can think of to refute this ludicrous comparison. Stick a fork in it…it’s done.

 

 

Bush vs. Obama: The Ego Matchup

A few days ago, President George W. Bush appeared on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. During the course of his appearance, President Bush presented his host with a portrait of Leno that he had painted himself.

At the time, I theorized that if Obama were to present Leno with a portrait that he’d painted, it would be of…Obama, not Leno.

And today, after seeing this photo of President Obama, taken in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of JFK’s death, I think I have a clear answer.

All Obama, all the time.

Shouldn’t The White House Be A Gun-Free Zone?

The First Family deserves our best efforts to keep them safe.

Update:  Oh, look here; it appears someone took this thought straight to the White House.

I mean, really. If the best way to keep vulnerable children safe at school is to designate schools as gun-free zones, shouldn’t the First Family live in a gun-free bubble?

Oh, I know that John Doe can’t carry a firearm into the White House, but what about all those Secret Service agents milling about the place? They have guns! And what about those Marines? Do you suppose they’ve checked their weapons at the door? I think not! It’s a scandal, really, how cavalier we are with the First Family’s safety!

Does that sound silly to you? I certainly hope so, yet that is the favored strategy of the American Liberal for protecting the nation’s school children…unless they are lucky enough to attend school with Sasha and Malia Obama.

Before [Sasha and Malia] go to their first day in their new school, the Secret Service will run background checks on the school’s staff and maybe some of the students and their families. Agents will accompany the girls to and from school every day. They may, depending on space, set up a small command center inside the building. If not, they’ll set one up outside. They may tap into the school’s closed-circuit camera system if there is one. 

How many agents will be assigned to the girls? “The appropriate number to get the job done,” according to my still secretive friend, Agent Alswang.

If gun-free zones are so safe, why all the fuss?

What about the President himself? Yes, he’s the most powerful man in the world and surely, very, very important, but is he more precious to us as a people than our children? (Note: If your answer is yes, please reassess your priorities.) I can say without hesitation, I would rather see a President dead – no matter who is sitting in the White House – than 20 six and seven-year-olds. At least those who choose to run for President know what they’re getting into.

My point here isn’t to say that the First Family needs less security; I’m saying that our nation’s schools need more. People who object to well-screened, well-trained, armed school personnel because they don’t want their children exposed to guns are living in a fantasy world where guns are malevolent beings in their own right and a gun-free zone sign extends magical protection to all who enter those hallowed halls.

If the events that unfolded in Newtown, Connecticut, last Friday haven’t disabused those magical thinkers of the idea that gun-free zones are anything other than killing zones, then nothing will; they should be ignored as unserious on this issue.

Doesn’t our nation’s most precious resource, our children, deserve the best protection we can provide? If so, arming school personnel should be considered as one part of the answer.

---

Thank you, John Hawkins, for two links today.

Who’s The Racist?

The American Left tosses the charge of racism around with abandon, so much so that they’ve cheapened the word to the point that it’s virtually meaningless; anything and everything that opposes any prominent liberal African-American person, but especially President Barack Obama, is subject to the accusation. (Liberal is key, here; conservative African-Americans will be ruthlessly and savagely attacked by the Left.)

The latest wave of baseless racism charges comes with speculation that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice may be nominated to serve as Secretary of State during President Obama’s second term. Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) has accused Senator John McCain of using a code word (we’ve discussed code words here before) by calling Ambassador Rice “incompetent” while questioning her qualifications to serve as Secretary of State. Rep. Clyburn apparently feels that the Ambassador’s recent and rather infamous appearances on no less than five Sunday morning news programs to promulgate the lie that the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, were the result of a crass, anti-Islam YouTube video isn’t grounds for criticism…when even an amoeba could see it was a terrorist attack, coming, as it did, on the anniversary of the September 11th.

Robert Turner sums it up nicely.

Now we have a member of the House Democratic leadership saying words such as “incompetent” are code words for racism.  Give me a [expletive deleted] break!  In the case of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, the use of the term incompetent is code for lacking the qualities needed for effective action.

David Duke is a racist.  There are many things you can call Senator John McCain, but that ain’t one of them.

Racism is an ugly thing; it has no place in a civil society, but voicing legitimate concerns isn’t racism; in fact, it is the opposite of racism in that it assumes that the recipient of the criticism is an individual capable of improving her performance rather than an otherwise featureless representative of her racial group in need of coddling and special protections in order to succeed.

Getting back to Rep. Clyburn’s claim that John McCain’s criticisms are based on racism…well, false charges of racism are ugly, too. Nothing in John McCain’s record would lead a reasonable person to believe he harbors any racist tendencies whatsoever. Rep. Clyburn knows this, but crassly makes the false charge. He demeans the experience of other African-Americans who have experienced real racism and dishonors the accomplishments of the Civil Rights era. Why? Because what he really wants to say sound so childish: “Shut up, Senator McCain! Shutupshutupshutupshutup!”

TMI

Really, I think I may be ill.

I realize we live in a society where nothing is off limits in public conversation, but, really, this is more information than I want to know about another couple’s bedtime rituals.  And if that weren’t bad enough, the columnist’s swooning is more befitting of a 12 year old girl at a Justin Bieber concert than an actual adult talking about the President of the United States. Which explains so much, if you think about it.

Jay Carney Bitchslaps The White House Press Corps

 

Do you see my middle finger? That represents laziness. And my index finger represents sloth. Either that or I’m hexing you.

Jay Carney calls the White House press corps slothful and lazy. I generally loathe journalists and this makes even my blood boil. Really. I’m nearly speechless.

Note to the press corps: At this point, the Obama Administration is the boyfriend who treats you like crap in public because he knows you don’t have the gumption to leave. Try and have a little self-respect.

Selling Obamacare

Not only are you paying for Obamacare in concrete and immediate ways with higher taxes, and skyrocketing insurance premiums (by the way, Jonathan Gruber is a lying SOB or too stupid to be associated with MIT), you’re also paying in ways for which the bill may not come due for decades, by killing medical innovation and decreasing the desirability of medicine as a profession.

But there’s one more way you’ll be paying that even the most pessimistic probably hadn’t anticipated: A $20 million PR campaign to sell the benefits of Obamacare to a recalcitrant public. The Obama Administration: Screwing the American taxpayer every day.

Oh, How The Mighty Have Fallen

Apparently Barack Obama is no longer a big enough fund-raising draw, so they’ve added Bill Clinton to sweeten the deal.

Just me, or are these presidential raffles unseemly?