Sunday, August 07, 2005

The Last of the Big Three

From LaShawn Barber's Corner, news that Peter Jennings, the anchor for ABC, is dead from lung cancer.

He was the last of the Big Three Anchors that I knew of while growing up, the other two being Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather.

RIP, Mr. Jennings (1938-2005).

Friday, August 05, 2005

The Trivialization of American Society, or The Rape of the Lock

Triviality. The American Heritage Dictionary meaning of that word is:

"Lack of importance, inconsequence, insignificance, unimportance."

A very perceptive friend recently commented to me about the "trivialization" of serious things, like rape, slavery, harassment, heroism. And she meant that it was done by women. Western women.

Yeah, this is going to offend some women, but I don't care. It's time some of them grow up and quit whining.

This comment by a lefty visitor here gave food for thought on this post. Regarding the atrocities committed against Muslim women, the commenter lamely attempted to compare "atrocities" done here in the US to its women! Here is the most egregious remark she made:

"How much did the government spend on breast cancer research last year? How much on prostate cancer? One report from the NATIONAL CANCER SOCIETY (a "you people" organization no doubt) states that comparitively speaking (in terms of numbers diagnosed) that the government is contributing approximately 60% as much for breast cancer research as it does for prostate cancer research. Is that an atrocity? you may not think so, maybe I don't even think so... some might... depends on if it's important to you or not I guess." (Misspelling is hers)

Yup, she was comparing the base treatment of women in non Western countries to the lack of funding for breast cancer in the US! And she's not even "sure" if it's an atrocity, but she used it as defense of her position. The gist of her thinking (and I use that term lightly) is like this:

Woman in Iran: "My husband beat me for burning the lamb last night."

Woman in India: "My father beat me for refusing to marry a man I do not like."

Woman in China: "My father sold me to a brothel because there are too many girls in the family."

Woman in US: "My father cut my allowance to $25.00 a week. I can't even afford a Louis Vuitton handbag with that kind of pittance!"

She and so many other women in this country suffer from the same idiocy: an inability to comprehend the ENORMITY of disparity between our culture and those of non-Western countries. Furthermore - and I blame feminists for this - they TRIVIALIZE
REAL CRIMES committed against women.

Case in point: Twice now this same commenter called anyone who challenged her to support her assertions "a schoolyard bully". I suppose when she was in grade school when the teacher corrected her by saying that 2+2=4, not 5, she ran home in tears and called her teacher a "bully". That sort of whiny hypersensitivity trivializes REAL bullying, which is when the biggest boy in the block beat up the smallest boy. Remember "A Christmas Story"? THAT kid was a bully.

Feminists also trivialize rape by asserting that when a college girl goes to a frat party, gets stinking drunk, goes into a room with one of the guys, sleeps with him, then gets kicked out of his room before dawn without a kiss, she was raped! Sorry, but I don't call that rape. I call that being sleazy, stupid and used.

Heroism has also been trivialized. A person who ran into a burning house and rescued a child trapped in a room was a hero. A Marine who dives on top of a grenade to prevent it from killing his squad is a hero. Those men who stormed the beaches of Normandy are heroes. Nowadays, feminists call any woman who writes a navel-gazing book about her "traumatic" childhood a "hero". Trivial drivel is more like it.

Remember poetry class in school? There was an 18th century poem written by an Englishman who truly exemplified the mightiness of the pen over the sword. His name was Alexander Pope, and his most popular work may have been the caustic "The Rape of the Lock", which, in mock-epic form, satirized the pettiness of 18th century society. I'll steal from SparkNotes to render a critique of this masterpiece:

The strategy of Pope's mock-epic is not to mock the form itself, but to mock his society in its very failure to rise to epic standards, exposing its pettiness by casting it against the grandeur of the traditional epic subjects and the bravery and fortitude of epic heroes: Pope's mock-heroic treatment in The Rape of the Lock underscores the ridiculousness of a society in which values have lost all proportion, and the trivial is handled with the gravity and solemnity that ought to be accorded to truly important issues. The society on display in this poem is one that fails to distinguish between things that matter and things that do not. The poem mocks the men it portrays by showing them as unworthy of a form that suited a more heroic culture. Thus the mock-epic resembles the epic in that its central concerns are serious and often moral, but the fact that the approach must now be satirical rather than earnest is symptomatic of how far the culture has fallen. (Emphasis mine).

The title itself proclaims the trivialization of what's important, assigning the cutting of a piece of hair as a "rape". Alexander Pope would find fertile ground in today's society. Here is what he writes when the Baron snips a lock of Belinda's hair:

Then flash'd the living Lightnings from her Eyes,

And Screams of Horror rend th' affrighted Skies.

Not louder Shrieks to pitying Heav'n are cast,

When Husbands or when Lap-dogs breath their last,

Or when rich China Vessels, fal'n from high,

In glittring Dust and painted Fragments lie!

Yeah, she screams more about her purloined curl than for the death of a husband or a pet dog.

In the end, Pope eulogizes the fate of the poor lock, which takes its place in the heavens as a martyr to the crimes committed against women:

Then cease, bright Nymph! to mourn the ravish'd Hair

Which adds new Glory to the shining Sphere!

Not all the Tresses that fair Head can boast

Shall draw such Envy as the Lock you lost.

For, after all the Murders of your Eye,

When, after Millions slain, your self shall die;

When those fair Suns shall sett, as sett they must,

And all those Tresses shall be laid in Dust;

This Lock, the Muse shall consecrate to Fame,

And mid'st the Stars inscribe Belinda's Name!

Silly isn't it? Another great writer coined a term for that kind of feminine hysteria: a tempest in a teapot.

Thursday, August 04, 2005

On a Lighter Side

I'm enjoying Bill Bryson's The Mother Tongue.

Anecdotally written, Bryson examines the history and development of the English language. For instance:

William Shakespeare wrote 17,677 words in his works, one-tenth of which were original! Can you imagine that every ten words you wrote was a new one? Some of the words he contributed to the language are:

Barefaced, critical, leapfrog, monumental, castigate, submerged, excellent, frugal, radiance, dwindle, countless, majestic, fretful, hurry, hint, gust, lonely, summit, pedant, obscene...

And then there are the phrases he coined:

One fell swoop, in my mind's eye, more in sorrow than in anger, to be in a pickle, vanish into thin air, budge an inch, play fast and loose, go down the primrose path, the milk of human kindness, remembrance of things past (and I thought that was Proust!), the sound and the fury, cold comfort, flesh and blood, foul play, tower of strength...

It's really staggering, the achievement of this man... not only in the breadth and depth of his plays and poetry, but in his contribution to the language itself. English is so much richer as a result of Shakespeare.

And here is a little quiz. Name the only two words in the entire English language that ends in "gry"!

A Not Too New Low for Liberals

Over at Mike's America we learn that the MSM is now digging dirt on Supreme Court Justice nominee John Roberts by researching the adoption records of his children, four-year-old Jack and five-year-old Josie.

Guess who is doing it? Yup, The New York Times (aka The New York Slimes).

According to Mike:

It's worse than that folks! Not only is the Times digging for dirt on Roberts' adopted children, not only did the Post run a distasteful column on the kids appearance, but in the dark corners of socialist hell holes they are saying much worse. I won't validate those cretins by repeating it, but suffice it say that if you said that about a liberal nominee's family there would be riots.

But hey, it's okay to throw slime at conservatives' children, isn't it?

When Rush (wrongfully) mocked Hillary's big thighs the leftys were crying "not fair!". And I agreed.

But to dig for dirt on a child is absolutely SCUMMY.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

PIG to Islam

Been reading this book by Robert Spencer: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades.

This informative guide explains the enigma that is Islam, using references to the Koran, Muhammed's life, and other Islamic texts.

He also uses sidebars such as "Muhammed vs. Jesus", where he takes quotes from the New Testament and from the Koran in order to contrast the differences in teachings. Not all religions are the same, according to Mr. Spencer.

Included are "Books You Are Not Supposed to Read", which are excellent references for further understanding the war on terror and the Middle East.

I found some interesting quotes from great people in history there too:

John Quincy Adams on Islam:

"In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar (i.e. Muhammed), the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an imposter, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic Law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE...Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant... While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men." (Emphasis in the original)

Whew. That's a far cry from President Bush's "Islam is a religion of peace."

I understand that the President has to keep a moderate tone in these times of sensitivity awareness, but isn't it intriguing to see what a former President, unfettered by the constraints of PC Mind Control, thinks of this religion?

There is even another quote by a more contemporary figure, Winston Churchill:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of Ancient Rome."

"Sheltered" indeed... Europe has abandoned all refuge against the imminent domination of Islam on her soil.

Furthermore, it's fascinating to note that both men consider the flagrant abuse of women in Islamic society as one of its worst qualities. Feminists who decry the "dead white males" of the past take heed...

Cruise Dementia

More funny pics on Tom Cruise's apparent loss of reason when he appeared on Oprah.

(H/T to Indigo Red.)

Monday, August 01, 2005

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

A Rant

Here we go again.

The names are becoming a blur to me. I mean the names of the children who go missing because of a pedophile. Fortunately in this case the girl was found alive after being kidnapped by a pedophile (who was from Mexico).

For this purpose, however, the name is not necessary. My beef is with the fact that the perp was LIVING WITH THE GIRL'S MOTHER!!!

Apparently after meeting this guy in April, he was living with the mother and daughter within a month!

I'm gonna go ballistic like Dr. Laura on this: WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH WOMEN??? So often I hear of these children being abused and murdered by the "boyfriend". And these stupid, daft and weak women LET THEM INTO THEIR HOMES. Right off the top of my head I can recall that some teen named Sarah was murdered by an ex-boyfriend of her mother's in Florida shortly after the Jessica Lunsford murder.

Then another girl in the midwest was murdered by... guess who? Yup, another "boyfriend" of the mother.

Are women so stupid that they can't seem to get it through their heads? If they are a single mother they should protect their children from these monsters, not let them into their lives! What kind of fool permits a strange man to move in with her after knowing him for only a month?

The number one priority for single mothers should be raising and protecting her child from harm. Not going out to clubs to meet guys (many of whom end up being losers). Are they so desperate that they will jump into bed with any creep that will take them?

Okay, I've had my rant. I'm sick to death of hearing about this and I'm beginning to think that any stupid cow whose child is killed by a "boyfriend" ought to be held accountable somehow.