Anthony Bialy | The Necropolitan Sentinel

Home » Articles posted by Anthony Bialy

Hate Away

Posted on May 20, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

It's important to keep hating those who wonder why our enemies hate us. There's slow learning, and then there are those who still embody the repulsive doltishness seen right after September 11 where some blamed the country that sustained unimaginable bloodshed for daring to be relatively permissive.

Those who feel compelled to apologize for liberty continue to puzzle why we're so wretched, but they're sure we painted a target on ourselves. Winning sides don't ask how we're supposed to placate our enemies, and they certainly don't conclude their own culture is illegitimate because a sliver of fellow citizens wear unflattering outfits at discount stores or choose to watch shows starring people famous for being untalented.

Sickos persist in thinking that the victims are those who created victims. Most egregiously, the Boston bombers were apparently so oppressed that they had to lash out in a limb- and life-destroying manner. Note who pondered what we did as a society to radicalize those otherwise peaceful Muslims for your party invitation blacklist. That's unless you feel our stinginess meant that we didn't hand their family enough welfare to buy protection from attack.

The perverse tendency to self-loathe is manifested most horrifyingly in America by those who think we have to qualify the freedom to live as we wish. We shouldn't care at all why the wicked hope to extinguish us.

Both our enemies and their apologists loathe us for living not in a certain manner but however we please. We strive to have no guidelines except to not murder or take things from each other, unlike our purportedly strict enemies. How offensive that we're not proscribed from leisure activities, not to mention engaging in such outrages as voting and letting women show their cheekbones.

Barbarians don't dig wusses any more than chicks do. Barack Obama did learn many radical lessons during the '90s, but not just from lunatic racists and bombers of federal institutions. Worst of all, he uses the Friends cast as a standard for manliness. Whining about how we must make the dark world adore us attempts to prove our worthiness by acting like castration victims who secretly enjoyed it. President Ross is going to have to mope that nobody appreciates how his only side is his sensitive one.

Our current policy of begging to please accept appeasement neither keeps us safe nor makes our enemies embrace us. Either medieval Cro-Magnons haven't heard the war is over or they've finally read the news scrolls and refuse to care that we don't wish to fight any longer. The assumption that Muslims possess uncontrollable rage over the slightest perceived slight is a scary reflection of the faith if it's true and of the patronizing pacifists who accept it as doctrine if it's false.

Life must be tough for despicable lunatics who can't decide between whether villains didn't commit the crimes of which they're accused or if they're heroes for assaulting the innocent. Do the most doltish of dunces want to free Jahar because they think he didn't do it or are sick enough to embrace his unbearably hideous assault? Is Mumia a framed victim or someone who stuck it to society by executing a police officer? Their blogs are never clear.

Expect eternal vagueness from the same monstrous dopes who think America both deserved September 11 and also perpetrated it. If the latter is true, the world's fringe should have begun admiring us for our self-loathing.

Don't like our apology for you attacking us? Here, have another. There are countless outrages about Benghazi including pretending the war on al-Qaeda is ended, acting as if extra security would be seen as hostile, pretending that sending help wouldn't have helped, proclaiming that a video protest got our ambassador killed, and shrugging that [bleep] happens. But the biggest frightening philosophical tip-off was when our president apologized for Islam prophet-slanders enabled by hateful elements such as Fox News and the First Amendment.

Obama won't comment on, say, Kermit Gosnell murdering the most innocent victims possible for sport and profit, but he has an opinion about which Americans can criticize which religions. If nothing else, Islamists disrespect him for his treacherous sacklessness.

Appeasement is manifested in blaming your own alleged side for failing to bow with sufficient force to reach and grasp the ankles. And all the pondering about how to change to please jerks may not quite be fruitful or prudent. If anyone hasn't noticed, enemy piles of garbage disguised as humans still hate us despite twice-electing the cool president, and him, for that matter.

Part of being an adult is accepting the simple truth that there are evil bastards who despise you for no good reason or sometimes precisely because there's no good reason. Jerks who hate you may at least respect you for not caring about their opinion and making it clear you're willing to crack skulls. Asking why they're aiming their shrapnel at us is like apologizing that our surrender flag isn't white enough.

There's never going to be an understandable reason why contemporary cavemen picked a war, unless you count committing the crime of existing. What's not helping the victory effort are affectedly contrite phonies who think it's good our supposed faults have been highlighted. The administration that allegedly wants to world to admire us could start by not treating allies like compost. The only thing worse than such self-loathing is its practitioners assuming everyone hates themselves as much as they do.

Anthony Bialy is a writer and “Red Eye” conservative in New York City. Follow him at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy. Download a free ebook of his 2012 columns at https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/270599.

Ripped Off in Pieces

Posted on May 16, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

A piecemeal approach leaves everyone hungry. Attempting a few half-assed plans every decade or so is no way to fix things or even pretend. Our dysfunctional junkie government got this way by just trying a little bit of angel dust at a time.

Nobody should be surprised that our labyrinth of regulations came about in such a disorientating way. Lack of vision leads to bashing knees on table corners, as seen by those blind to our problems who think little modifications are all that's needed to correct horrible policies.

Our border is naturally leaky considering the efforts to seal the gaps with Scotch tape. If those responsible for our current immigration situation were trying to sneak in the country using the same approach, they'd be stuck on a fence with only Tang powder to stave off dehydration. With their foresight in mind, it's a wonder we don't have turnstiles installed on the edge of San Diego.

A couple bills every now and then that seek to appease foreigners who don't like this country enough to obey its rules have somehow failed to alleviate the problem. We should know by now that people who don't respect our boundaries also tend to be insufferably and doltishly amoral. The question is, what do we do with non-citizens who disobeyed our laws to get here and now think it's our job to accommodate their desire to be here?

The moaning of those who want to melt the pot itself highlights the need for a wholly different strategy. Any approach that doesn't start with spraying Pam on a giant solid fence that stands at our porous country line and the intention to boot anyone we find who sneaked in appeases their interests, not ours.

The expense of not locking the door goes beyond the huge price tag. If we can't control who's here, there's not much that can be kept safe at all. E-Verify won't stop illegal hiring, but background checks for guns will stop crime? Okay. Every chicken wire stopgap fix tacitly presumes the uninvited's rights trump those of the hosts.

Oblivious to the drain caused by whoever last got to raise taxes, today's lawmakers strive to grab a little bit more from those well-heeled segments who are not presently politically fashionable. Don't worry: you'll get your turn to get hosed, presuming you have any hope of making more than you earn today. The only certain tax policy aside from those who oppose onerously high rates getting ironically hassled is that they need more right now than they got before. They're only taking from rich bastards who wouldn't otherwise buy products that create jobs or hire you directly.

The fragmented approach to collecting revenue has turned the economy into smithereens. The incessant rate tweaks and deductions always result in punishment for advancing. It would be far preferable to have one low rate rather than consolation prizes for oppressive brackets that reward relationship status or domicile purchase.

Thank the current income grabbing schematic on oh so well-considered wartime measures that persist long after the war. The withholding of income to fund efforts to expel the Axis from Europe and the Pacific Rim continue to conceal the pain of tax day.

Perhaps trivia ringers can summon an example of when Washington encouraging behavior has ever been a wise idea. Governmental good intentions have led to good results that one time in the future that Keynesians assure us is on the horizon.

The thought of scrapping the capsizing vessel by charging people for their federal services with either one percentage for every income or purchase would reduce the process's invasive nature. But maybe another escalation of the progressive variety is going to fix our finances. Hitting an iceberg on the hull's other side could even it out.

As for our physical beings, we've been sawing off a gangrenous limb with one hacksaw pass at a time. Health care needs a new general diagnosis. Instead, we get a different quack at every upstairs medical clinic. The necessity of constant tweaks should be a sign that the whole is rotten straight through. Getting health care through work indefinitely because of another danged World War II-era law is not a great indicator of foresight.

Our prescription sucks, and the real cure requires a more holistic approach. Specifically, the government should start again and announce you can buy insurance wherever you want. Such an open competition to keep you healthy would beat having to hope for a decent plan at work or, ugh, from your loving government. Making everyone subsidize everyone else is cunning until the first person realizes that they're getting soaked for the privilege of trying.

Just because hindsight is easy doesn't mean it's not a worthwhile endeavor. The fact time exists makes it effortless to look back and see what went wrong than to anticipate the future. It's totally necessary and acceptable to see the way that knee-jerking to momentary problems has left us with only worn joints.

The government's approach to business is not the same as business's approach, as seen in everything your unhealthily reactive leaders have ever done. Washington's needling little responses inevitably damage the intended beneficiaries, but that's just the natural result of not caring enough to do a comprehensively wise job in the first place.

Standards Shifted

Posted on May 13, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

A declining country's problems start with failing to recognize that shame is a gift. It may not be fun to feel bad about getting away with something, but responsible people nonetheless instill that urge starting with kindergarteners.

Feeling guilty about having to accept something complimentary should motivate people to begin behaving or earning. But the dangerous unencumbered sensation is bad for both individuals and the whole group. For once, liberals seem uncharacteristically unworried about the latter's state.

Humans used to harness uncomfortableness with an unpleasant situation as motivation. But the Obama administration's goal is to make people feel agreeable with a brazenly unproductive lifestyle that counts on the benevolence of productive suckers. Thanks to the economy, countless Americans have the chance to see if they enjoy not doing much.

Back before dignity was ruled to be an obsolete virtue by a panel of public tweeters talking too loudly in a restaurant, it was considered decent to keep welfare a secret. We quietly provided assistance to those who asked for it. Now in our boisterous times, your government is loudly asking if anyone needs a handout in an effort to weed out all this defiant individualism and profiting.

A warped perspective makes any nonsense seem possible. It's unsurprising that people who are doing okay will think, yes, maybe they could do with a bit of benefits only if hectored enough. That's especially so if the dispensers insist on querying subjects on if they need help until they get the answer they want, namely the one that will get the targets accustomed to the dole. Ask people “What's wrong?” enough times, and the very nature of the phrasing will help them cast their mindset to find something lacking in their finances.

Recall those halcyon days when we used to have enough class to be quiet while offering aid to preserve the nobility of those facing genuine need. But the clamoring emanating from racing to the basement means delusional bastards who think getting as many on public help as possible will mean success.

Real triumph consists of getting participants off welfare, not keeping them on it, unless we're now presuming man's best hope is the security of regular benefits dolloped by case worker saviors. The goal should be to reduce the number or people who have the same proportionate gap between what they make and spend as the federal government.

As the percentage of recipients increase, there are bound to be more shiftless scofflaws taking from both earners and those in peril who could genuinely use a few months of assistance. That's why they shouldn't be a first resort. Nothing's more discouraging than encouraging the replacement of “united” with “welfare” as the modifier of “states.” The White House sees no problem in accepting mediocrity as a sign of greatness if you're wondering why our foreign policy is the way it is.

People find it far easier to justify being entitled to entitlements once you've dispensed with the stigma of resenting those who have achieved more. Such hatefulness used to be dismissed as a sad approach to life that only made the holders of the views have pitiably dark outlooks.

But now, unambitious envy is encouraged as the only path to retribution after mysterious Wall Street goons who must not have names ripped off the common man, namely by trying to do something with the toxic mortgages the government handed them. The only actually guilty parties are those who also advocated such deleterious policies. Look for them in Obama's cabinet.

It's one thing to be broke and entirely another to be bitter about it because existence owes you a living. There's a whole world where nothing feels guilty, leading to claims that an imperceptible decrease in the growth of the rate of unfathomable spending can be classified as austerity.

The ulterior motives of a feckless administration selling a perverse pride in heedlessness are clear. It's understandable that people who junked the economy and thought submission would end bloodshed prefer a world where nobody faces repercussions for their decisions. But that doesn't mean we should accept the White House's standard for subsidized fading.

Don't act surprised that uninhibited behavior is so commonplace. An economy kept wretched by Obamanomics is cited as proof Americans can't care for themselves, if you're looking for a handy example of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The sick pride in being comfortable at the expense of whichever crazy workers fund the beast is manifested by nonchalantly swiping federally-issued plastic magically loaded with currency. You're considered a fool not to take a card.

Old-school reactionaries claim people used to have to subtract money from your own earnings or at least promise to pay it back. The Obama administration seeks control through petty bribes of the underclass. The only people they try to make feel bad are earners. Wait: will that make the last workers stop?

Reason to Earn

Posted on May 9, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

It's much easier to thrive if you have incentive to do so, even if it's only to not have much of the payoff seized. Providing a reason to work hard is better than baiting people to wait for a ration. In lieu of accepting that humans don't stay the same and thus giving them a reason to strive for attainment, the ruling class spends their calculating terms figuring how to divide one pie instead of enabling us to bake more. Don't fall for it: motivation is real, if the rumors are to be believed.

Everyone modifies their actions in view of the rules. For one, people only sneak into a country if they first think it's better than their current dump and then figure they can get away with it. If illegals think they will be caught, they may just leave. We just have to get over being mean enough to have standards about who is able to stroll into our nation.

We don't need to plan on deporting everyone who skulked in, although only a very silly country would question both checking if the people in it are allowed to be here and removing them if not. America should guard its border not just with a laser gator fence but also by making punishments severe for being caught hopping it.

Illegal aliens will leave not just because we meanly use the dictionary definition of what they are. Self-deportation will become a frequent occurrence if they know they'll face punishment for being where they shouldn't. After all, it happened in Arizona, that racist Nazi compound that scared away people who weren't allowed to be there by threatening to dare enforce laws. Even better, many self-righteous apologists for border-erasing stayed away from the state, making it that more attractive to those looking for a desert climate and few progressives.

Faced with punishment, people may react by reluctantly entering legitimate industries. Negative reinforcement also works when it comes to creating legally-binding lists of why one should behave. Knowing that bad things will happen to them if they do bad things might be discouragement enough to potential bandits.

With that in mind, non-felonious people don't have to be armed: they just need shady types to know that they may be. Criminals just have to think you might have something holstered you could point at them to improve your safety. Eliminating gun-free zones puts doubt in evil minds, as they have inducement in the form of possibly getting their asses handed to them by possible victims to learn a trade other than murderous stealing.

Maybe people who desire to give money away so something worthwhile can be done with it really would be foolish with it. Regardless, taxes should be meant to fund the minimal functions necessary so we can earn in peace, not so people purportedly smarter than us can use our money to construct happiness for us. They're trying to create a reality where we owe Washington for the right to exist when they should be unleashing earners by providing them with reasons to invent machines that effectively print cash.

The only thing that will never change is everything changing. Yet the alleged forces of optimism assume the economy will always be in the same state, as if people won't feel more motivated if they're allowed to retain more wages. This financial contraption could rocket if only people weren't punished for earning.

It's not an argument about the proper rate but rather the proper approach. If someone offers to hold your hand and escort you through the bank parking lot, don't trust them with your PIN.

The virtual world is the same. Proficiency at computers and magic phones connected through the cosmos to all the information is a demonstration of what unregulated humans can accomplish. It thus sets a bad example for those who already screwed up more encumbered facets of human life. The internet works fine, so we better get the government on mucking it up.

Keeping people from being able to afford as much junk as they want from ether retailers implies localities should make do with more. But the best way to get municipalities thriving is to promote commerce.

Those who still think ingenuity is chiefly keyed by paved roads fear that we'll see interactions thrive when the state sticks to mostly interfering only for criminal matters. Or, we can punish companies by forcing them to collect sales tax for places where they don't receive services before yelling at them for not growing.

Sometimes, encouragement can be as easy as not doing something to get in the way of others. A schedule filled with nothing should be a joy for the most indolent of presidents. Barack Obama ought to think of the economy the way he treats his presidency, namely by investing as little effort as possible to make it appear he's earning his check. The active decision to be inactive would provoke more energy and confidence in the country than his current plan of paying people to be resentful and not work.

Stay Dumb

Posted on May 6, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

1 Comment

Your president and his worker bees are the smartest guys in the room; if you doubt it, just ask them. They're so busy being hyper-intelligent brilliance geniuses that they don't have time for pedestrian concerns like retaining life lessons. The deflating trend is to use ideology as a substitute for learning instead of a byproduct of having learned. They want to repeat the mistakes that sabotaged us, because what are the chances that the results would be bad again?

It's one thing to be open-minded, but maybe having numerous examples of jumping from a great height should convince us that the best possible result is broken legs. Let's perhaps not try the same techniques that ruined us.

Beg the government to stop helping. America's most famous bout with letting Washington attempt to repair its own mess led to your grandparents saving all the bacon fat and empty mayonnaise jars. The Great Depression resulted from trying to cure a not-so-great downturn, as attempts to fix it actually prolonged it. The economy doesn't respond to bribery as well as humans do. It's better to let a broken leg repair itself than straighten the bone with a non-surgical hammer.

We just couldn't let the economy rebound on its own, perhaps aided by throttling down attempts to run it by bureaucrats who couldn't run their own wallets. Believing the government has both an active role in making us rich and saving us when we're poor assumes election winners know how to use money better than those who made it. If unilateral action against the economy worked, our biggest problem would be how to maneuver around random cash piles.

Instead, your executive realtor will ensure we never have to worry about homes costing what they're worth. Pushing subprime mortgages again despite how it already screwed our economy is like pouring gasoline on a burning house just to see if we can finally build something from the ashes. The next time anyone from this White House acts condescending, remember they're still intent on making mortgages available to people who can't afford them.

The purpose of our government is to preserve the conditions that allow people to earn. Alternately using it improperly to make things affordable makes us broke. People can buy what they want and will invest in what's necessary with no prodding necessary other than the prospect of profit.

Those whose economic understanding ended at the used textbook store fail to understand that, if there was, say, potential in battery-powered cars and a solar-powered country, people would be begging to allowed to invest. Humans should be allowed to make their own bets and reap the rewards. Somehow, the government isn't as careful with money it's handed.

Or maybe the best way to spur growth is to punish those who advance. The idea that people should owe a higher percentage because they've made more creates a low threshold for contentment. Yet a president who acts like every day on Earth is his first still thinks Americans achieve greatness because of their government's help and not because we're seldom bothered.

Perhaps having a screwed-up outlook isn't helping. Only liberals could think “regressive” means the same rate for everyone. If the system is out of whack, getting it back to normal isn't a radical act.

What's really making us ill is doubling down on our health care failures. Those unaware that our government spends more than it collects may find it to be news how this country has already tried semi-socialized medicine. Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, employer tax break, interstate limits, endless lawsuits, mandatory emergency room treatment, and countless insurance mandates have combined to half-ruin healthcare. And yet Obama still thinks the answer is to indulge fully in compulsory misery.

Even less salubrious for us is denying how a sliver of one religion is out to murder us. Our leaders are still not absorbing the lesson of the centuries about how appeasement doesn't lead to peace. Tiptoeing around jihadism leads to wondering why lunatic Muslims allowed to immigrate and collect benefits would want to attack a marathon. Whether not thinking there's a danger or wanting to avoid offending our enemies, the result of nonchalance regarding security is a missed chance to keep spectators from losing limbs or lives.

Those reluctant to examine history should ignore their aversion and do themselves a favor, especially since it doesn't involve delving too far into the stacks. One only has to look back as recently as the '90s to see that ignorance is only blissful for so long when villains want your blood. It's easier to take out your enemy when you know who he is, but that requires paying attention and perhaps being mean toward murderers.

We keep doing the same things and wonder why we don't get better. America is like a football team tanking for the improved draft pick all so they can get a punter. It's unsurprising that those attached to wretched ideologies never realize that we possess countless examples why they don't work.

Unsafe, Illegal, and Frequent

Posted on May 2, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

The abortion discussion is just beginning, which is bad news for people who don't want you thinking about the during part. The pro-one-choice movement naturally wants the trial of the face of concentrated evil Kermit Gosnell to be the end of the exposure to atrocity. But it must be the start.

The fact infants can survive abortion tells you all you need to know about it. The procedure's defenders are hoping you don't notice that it usually involves slightly less barbarism than a horror film villain who targeted those who were technically no longer unborn. It's not a distinction for civilized people.

An everyday bloodbath doesn't make headlines, which is convenient to the forces of sanctimony. Your president and his band are too busy yelling for more gun control to learn when a conceived child's heart begins beating. Even his defense team admits Gosnell was killing; it's merely a matter to them of whether or not the victims were exposed to fresh air. Every abortion ends a life. Meanwhile, very few guns are used in crimes. Guess which one the left wants regulated into oblivion.

The argument to be able to remove the unwanted contents of a uterus becomes ever more ridiculous because of the evidence's terms. The abortion side has to pretend they're not in favor of legalized murder to avoid the hassle and expense of raising a person. The science they claim to embrace keeps telling us more about the signs of life displayed by the fetuses they target. They don't want the discussion about why it's okay to kill a baby as long as it doesn't escape the womb first. Now that's female empowerment.

Shut up and let the left win, the most tolerant among us gently suggest to those with whom they have disagreements. We're supposed to accept something barbaric because the Supreme Court told us to decades ago. You reactionaries don't even realize that five judges get to decide what's both moral and hidden in the Constitution. Yet the ghost of Dred Scott might disagree.

Just claim that any morally objectionable procedure that harms other people to the degree that it should patently be illegal is a personal choice. Supporters of slavery loved getting self-righteous about preserving their abhorrent lifestyle, too, but don't notice that comparison or the incredible damage to minority communities caused by the option to commit self-genocide.

Maybe a sob story will help distract from the genuine issue. The honor student whose parents brought him from Mexico to escape murder gangs is the immigration equivalent when we should be talking about the threat to our security and economy. Abortion is no different.

Many don't even know what choice led them to the “pro-” side: they bring up rape, incest, and the mother's health as if that's why there is such intense opposition to abortion's legality. Yet most pro-life people will concede or at least discuss those exceptions, with the point being that they are not the rule. The recoiling is in response to abortion used as birth control, and anyone who has “reproductive justice” in their Twitter bio who says otherwise is at best being disingenuous.

It's in their interest to get complicated. Try as they might, they can't get around how simple the argument is. It's impossible to negotiate around the fact that the procedure universally ends in death. It certainly is a women's issue, namely for the females who never get a chance because of potential parents who couldn't be bothered. The sanctimony about ladies' bodies is never accompanied by concern for the body growing within.

The beef about this being an issue only for those capable of impregnation is with the genetic lottery, so anyone unhappy about the genitals they were assigned can take it up with Darwin. Men have every right to be outraged about the issue, unless we're resigned to accepting an atrocious existence where humans can only understand what might affect them personally.

The nature of reality is available to all: those who invest faith in circumstances always act as if they either still are shocked when the stork story turns out to be untrue or that there is no possibility to not bonk constantly. Pants can stay on?

Flukey humans who are so feckless that claim to be unable to afford birth control or get it to work are just going to have to learn how to cope with the challenges presented by human existence. Instead, they presently blame their alleged misfortunes on those pro-life activists who think a slightly less gruesome procedure than the one preferred by Gosnell is unacceptable.

Or maybe there was a human slaughterhouse in Philadelphia because of the laws against it. Those who like choices as long as they result in abortion unbelievably but unsurprisingly claim that it's because abortion just isn't legal enough. The fourth-trimester procedures are the fault of those horrified by all lives ended before they begin, you see. These antiabortion people somehow think it's never okay to flush what's fertilized, so blame them and not the culture that sees the miracle of life as a case of parasites.

With a mass killer who held the title “abortionist” on trial for what he did at work, the pro-choice crowd is left with the dilemma of either pretending to go through the show of thinking each procedure is unfortunate or not bothering to react at all. To them, it's acceptable to see children as an inconvenience that are nothing more than flesh sacks who burden bank accounts and social lives; just get the aborting done quickly. Expect them to bring up the specter of back-alley abortions without acknowledging the danger remains the same to the unborn.

“Don't like abortion? Don't have one” fails to work if you replace “abortion” with “mugging” and “have” with commit.” It's as if someone getting hurt factors into whether an activity should be legal. The pain and death caused by eliminating a high percentage of humans before they even get a chance is happening regularly away from the case The New York Times still ignores. For the decent, slightly less worse than Gosnell isn't good enough.

UPDATE by Dan: Scumbag grifter Terry McAuliffe, running for Governor in VA:

Moe Lane has more.

We here didn't have much to say about Obama's two shout-outs to Jason Collins, the NBA player who came out as gay the other day. NFL running back David Kopay came out in 1975, and Navratilova came out in 1981. I felt that Anderson Cooper was worth a shrug, and I feel the same way about Collins. Was it brave? I guess. Was it heroic? I don't think so, given the precedents. But the President, who won't speak to Gosnell because it's still being adjudicated, had no qualms about speaking to Trayvon. After you strip away all the hyperbole, the President is saying, this is acceptable, that is not. Okay. But I want the President to say, "Gosnell is not acceptable." He won't. There's a stunning lack of reciprocity in the way that these progtards want to make all their problems yours (by any means at all), but don't give a rat's ass about things that you care about. Like . . . babies.

You must make your problems theirs. You must make them answer, beginning with the lecturer in chief, whose choice of 'teachable moments' never includes learnable ones.

Shot Down

Posted on April 29, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

Thankfully, guns seem to have gone back to being an issue for grown-ups. Enough casual voters have breathed deeply following the latest atrocity's exploitation that we can get back to figuring how to preserve rights while protecting the most innocent among us.

America is back to its default defense setting where it's commonly realized that the only way to stop murderous maniacs is with barely preemptive trigger pulling. Well, it's true for everyone outside New York and Connecticut, but America is mostly different.

While we don't know as much about science as we'd like to think, we have absolutely ascertained that the planet is stocked with jerks who want to maim you for sundry reasons, including no reason at all. The principle of defending against wickedness remains the same no matter the scale: as with international politics, the jerks will be packing regardless of the rules. Therefore, righteous nations must have armies just like righteous people must have well-stocked gun safes. There are diabolical actors who are only put in their place by good critics, so let's shoot some bad guys here.

Fans of personal arming don't just have the rational reasons on their side: they also have the visceral ones. Those differ from emotional reasons, which are all the coffin exploiters have. They are easiest to spot through their shrieking about keeping society safe by limiting the length of magazines which they refer to as “clips” in a classic demonstration of firearms knowledge.

Anti-gun nuts also don't see why anyone facing three criminals would need four bullets, as shooting the guns out of each hand is enough violence. Of course, they don't really grasp that there are villains out there to begin with, which makes their halfhearted pleas to arm only with Joe Biden-approved shotguns ring as hollow as a fired blast from a balcony. Vicious right-wing terrorists are only gunning down those who are victimized by heartless conservative tax cuts, you know, because a voluntary mugging implies humans are outfitted with free will.

Conversely, gunpowder aficionados can sense that the right to self-preservation is inherent to life on this plane. In addition to the endless reasonable arguments they can make about the nature of evil, enough freedom fans know that those who obey rules deserve the ability to turn fights they don't start into fair ones. Everyday challenges are exhausting enough without the specter of a covetous jerk threatening existence over currency or Apple product. We have every right to pull out a gun to aim instead of a billfold to surrender.

Adults exercising the right to carry can protect minors as well as themselves. The murderous are often only deterred by the prospect of return fire. That said, the grabbers can keep young citizens safe, too, as long as sanctimony works. Shameless gun control advocates are shamefully still going to parade out kids in a certain sign that they have terrific arguments not based in exploiting fear.

So, you're for children getting gunned down? If you bother pointing out that armed good guys act as guardians of kids who face violent monsters, be prepared for the reply that everyone with a gun is bad.

Which sort of audacity do you prefer? Whippersnappers are used as props by those who think their solutions are beyond debate or if they simply shamelessly lust after retaining power. They claim that people who want to keep terrorists on an island prison are irrational. But first: protect kids by telling psychotics the places where the innocent are not allowed to be armed. Maybe a law about folding stocks that no one will obey is going to keep dastards from spraying bullets.

Limiting firearm access has always been about getting what they can by exploiting whatever spilled blood they can find. The gun controllers take it one restriction at a time. For one, their mercifully failed attempt to push uselessly counterproductive background checks happened not because they thought it will make us safer but rather because it's what they figured they could pass. Letting an always-accurate government sift through your records for the honor of exercising a constitutional right is the closest they presently hoped to get to grabbing your guns. The first surly teen president is suitably furious.

At least we expect this from the side that openly disrespects gun rights. By contrast, the Republican dopes in the Senate who bowed to Democrats should have learned better by now. Aligning with all-time slimeball Chuck Schumer should have been an instant sign that they were duped into a rights-punching failure.

Nonetheless, the control appeasers sided with disarming specialists who feel gun buyers who haven't done anything wrong should have to submit to justification. They prefer lecturing about the Fourth Amendment to explaining why criminals will bother submitting to background examinations.

The worst thing that can happen for gun banners is people thinking calmly. Any society that recognizes adults should be trusted thinks that we possess the right to be armed against those who should not and are anyway. The difference is that they don't have confidence in anyone decent.

The only thing in which those who flaunt the “gun safety” euphemism invest faith is the government. It's no surprise that those frightened of guns let six-year-olds write their political platform. Liberals are the sort who let children dictate why we can't let the rich pay less in taxes while the economy is bad because of the meanness. Wanting to protect kids doesn't mean adopting all their ideas. You'd grow weary of eating at Chuck E. Cheese's every night.

Back to Progress

Posted on April 25, 2013 By Anthony Bialy

The only consolation of constantly feeling melancholy and busted is that everything is reversible. The impermanence of life is frustrating to recall when everything is going well, but that's not presently a problem.

We can actually achieve a well-earned nice time as soon as we realize we're each the ones responsible for it instead of waiting for the hive to collectively choose. America doesn't have to tread in the cesspool of pain no matter how many leaders assure us that such a dreary fate is a comfortably pleasant alternative.

We're not here to accept decline as inevitable, as that's for dim bores who dread the future. It would be easier to feel sad for those progressive-minded people if they weren't so busy dragging us into the same abyss where they perversely feel comfortable. But not everyone wants to feel unburdened by ownership and responsibility.

The first step is to get sick of this. It's potentially easy to turn around from our irksome slump considering how people can't be content with what they thought would be a daily trip to the Wonka Factory. Some magical candy entrepreneur Barack Obama turned out to be. Simply remind everyone whom property belongs to and how much better it's treated in private hands, and we're already off to a great start.

A strong nation would and can stop accepting the terms of bullies who can't even fight that well. We don't have to let the tinniest of pots aim missiles at us. Any country with a modicum of self-respect would figure how to afford to shoot them down and pair willingness with the purpose to watch dictators mope as their warheads burst prematurely. We shouldn't let persistent commies or barbarians dictate the terms of our existence. More importantly, a little earned self-confidence makes staring down brutes much easier a task.

Worthwhile ideas survive even if their most tireless advocates pass away. The twin titans of the last conservative surge decided on their own to make the decade most tubular. Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher struggled to keep from laughing at those who thought supervising the descent into madness would have qualified as success. The Baroness's passing reminded us of the impossibly bleak future of melancholy statism. If you want to preserve her memory, look for federal agencies to lop.

Thanks to the constraints of the space-time continuum, the giants of government-punching didn't have their own examples to inspire them. But the lack of precedent didn't slow the shift. People then had nothing more than punk to get them through the desolation of nationalization, a musical reaction to state-sponsored misery the left would like you to ignore began during Labour's reign. We lucky denizens of the future get to know that it is more than theoretically possible to reverse going backward, not to mention that you can experience the three-chord joys of the past on your futuristic pocket music contraption.

Collectivism just leads to all of us remaining stagnant. Nothing promotes laziness than expecting someone else to do it. Everyone owning everything leads to nobody caring. Liberty means humans have the right to order pizza, not take a slice of another's order while self-righteously citing how lacking in compassion it is to let another starve.

We only have countless examples through the centuries of why the government is full of people with swell intentions and no accomplishments, unless currency incineration counts. People who say they're acting for your own good sure don't seem to care about how you're teetering on the poverty line, aside from how they belatedly claim they are the ones who pull you from the edge.

In reality, compassion lies in creating circumstances where people can buy their own things, not in buying things for people. The best thing about not expecting the government to, say, pay for your schooling is knowing the economy will be in good enough shape that there will be jobs available after graduating.

The purveyors of shared hopelessness are trying their hardest to counter the hideous example of contemporary reality. They can get away with it, but only for a few elections at a time. Consider the gap between intended life-saving and the reality of the government making you buy worthless insurance as a perfect example.

All we need now is to place a Craigslist ad for a leader. There has to be someone out there who hungers for higher office and is willing to promote a greater future than continual eight percent unemployment. An endless vacation isn't a blast when you are unable to afford mini-umbrellas, much less cocktails or hollowed-out pineapples. Also, the couch is not in Maui.

Take heart despite the bleeding hearts, as we've reached great heights before from a far less bouncy landing spot. Those who didn't get totally useful history degrees may be surprised to learn that this is not the first time politicians ominously decided government was what made us super.

The nation has already survived FDR's federalizing of working and/or not bothering, LBJ's loss in the War on Poverty, and Double W's arrogantly racist scheming, even if we haven't quite rolled back all that collectivist claptrap. Think of the piles of collapsed engineering as a series of obstacles to overcome to make success sweeter.

These times are yet one more example of the folly of ceding personal autonomy while thinking that being forced to all be in this together will create bliss. We'll look back to today and see dark times, especially if solar mandates come into effect. Once again, too many have accepted the supreme fallacy that the ceaseless misery is the best possible option. The only relief is knowing nothing is permanent. Just rally the citizens once they get bored of being broke.