Nazi Platform

A reflection on the Nazi Platform and its possible basis of comparison to modern American politics.

The Program of the German Workers’ Party is a program for our time.
The leadership rejects the establishment of new aims after those set out in the Program have been achieved, for the sole purpose of making it possible for the Party to continue to exist as the result of the artificially stimulated dissatisfaction of the masses.

National Socialist German Workers Party Platform	American Equivalent	Basis
1. We demand the uniting of all Germans within one Greater Germany, on the basis of the right to self-determination of nations.	Right	Nationalism
2. We demand equal rights for the German people (Volk) with respect to other nations, and the annulment of the peace treaty of Versailles and St. Germain.	Libertarian	Isolationism
3. We demand land and soil (Colonies) to feed our People and settle our excess population.	Right	Nationalism
4. Only Nationals (Volksgenossen) can be Citizens of the State.	Right	Citizenship
Only persons of German blood can be Nationals, regardless of religious affiliation.	Right	Nationalism and Religious Freedom
No Jew can therefore be a German National.	Far Left / Far Right	Antisemitism
5. Any person who is not a Citizen will be able to live in Germany only as a guest and must be subject to legislation for Aliens.	Right	Immigration
6. Only a Citizen is entitled to decide the leadership and laws of the State.	Right	Voter ID
We therefore demand that only Citizens may hold public office, regardless of whether it is a national, state or local office.	Right	Nationalism
We oppose the corrupting parliamentary custom of making party considerations, and not character and ability, the criterion for appointments to official positions.	Left	Democracy over Republicanism
7. We demand that the State make it its duty to provide opportunities of employment first of all for its own Citizens.	Left	Government Job Creation
If it is not possible to maintain the entire population of the State, then foreign nationals (non-Citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.	Right	Immigration
8. Any further immigration of non-Germans is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after August 2, 1914, be forced to leave the Reich without delay.	Right	Immigration
9. All German Citizens must have equal rights and duties.	Left	Equal Rights
10. It must be the first duty of every Citizen to carry out intellectual or physical work.	Right	Duty to Work
Individual activity must not be harmful to the public interest and must be pursued within the framework of the community and for the general good. We therefore demand:	Left	Limitation on Freedom of Expression
11. The abolition of all income obtained without labor or effort.	Left	Unearned Income
Breaking the Servitude of Interest.	Left	Anti-Bank
12. In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.	Left	War Profiteering
13. We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts).	Left	Government Ownership of Production
14. We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises.	Left	Profit-sharing
15. We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes.	Left	Social Security
16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class;	Left	"Maintenance" of Middle Class
the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen.	Left	Communism and Trade Unions
We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities.	Left	Small Business over Low Prices
17. We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes.	Left	Eminent Domain for Public Use
Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land.	Left	Anti-Speculation
18. We demand ruthless battle against those who harm the common good by their activities. Persons committing base crimes against the People, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished by death without regard to religion or race.	Left	Anti-Bank
19. We demand the replacement of Roman Law, which serves a materialistic World Order, by German Law.	Left	Anti-Capitalism
20. In order to make higher education – and thereby entry into leading positions – available to every able and industrious German, the State must provide a thorough restructuring of our entire public educational system.	Left	Free Education
The courses of study at all educational institutions are to be adjusted to meet the requirements of practical life.	Left	Government Mandated Curriculum
Understanding of the concept of the State must be achieved through the schools (teaching of civics) at the earliest age at which it can be grasped.	Right	Civics
We demand the education at the public expense of specially gifted children of poor parents, without regard to the latters’ position or occupation.	Left	Free Education
21. The State must raise the level of national health by means of mother-and-child care, the banning of juvenile labor, achievements of physical fitness through legislation for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and maximum support for all organizations providing physical training for young people.	Left	Compulsory Education
22. We demand the abolition of hireling troops and the creation of a national army.	Right	National Military
23. We demand laws to fight against deliberate political lies and their dissemination by the press. In order to make it possible to create a German press, we demand:	Right	Anti-Press
a) all editors and editorial employees of newspapers appearing in the German language must be German by race;	Right	National Language
b) non-German newspapers require express permission from the State for their publication. They may not be printed in the German language;	Right	Non-Citizen Laws
c) any financial participation in a German newspaper or influence on such a paper is to be forbidden by law to non-Germans and the penalty for any breach of this law will be the closing of the newspaper in question, as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-Germans involved.	Right	Immigration
Newspapers which violate the public interest are to be banned.	Left	Government Controlled Media
We demand laws against trends in art and literature which have a destructive effect on our national life, and the suppression of performances that offend against the above requirements.	Right	"Right and Wrong" in Art
24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations, provided that they do not endanger the existence of the State or offend the concepts of decency and morality of the Germanic race.	Right	Freedom of Religion
The Party as such stands for positive Christianity, without associating itself with any particular denomination.	Right	Pro-Christianity
It fights against the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a permanent revival of our nation can be achieved only from within, on the basis of: Public Interest before Private Interest.	Far Left / Far Right	Antisemitism
25. To carry out all the above we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the Reich.	Left	Authoritarian Government
Unquestioned authority by the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and over its organizations in general.	Left	Anti-Federalism
The establishment of trade and professional organizations to enforce the Reich basic laws in the individual states.	Left	Trade Unions

The Party leadership promises to take an uncompromising stand, at the cost of their own lives if need be, on the enforcement of the above points.
Munich, Germany
February 24, 1920.

---

source:
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/platform-of-the-national-socialist-german-workers-rsquo-party

Self-test: Am I Literally Hitler?

I know what you've been wondering. "How can I tell if I'm literally Hitler or not?" Well, here's a handy test to see if you are!

Question 1 - Employment is down. Do you:
A. Lower taxes for businesses.
B. Increase government spending on infrastructure (e.g. roads).

Question 2 - More families have both parents in the work force. Do you:
A. Give families subsidies which are transferable to the school or daycare of their choice.
B. Open public education centers, including "Gardens of Children" for the very young.

Question 3 - Healthcare is expensive. Do you:
A. Loosen regulation providing competition between insurance companies across state lines.
B. Provide single-payer healthcare where doctors' salaries are paid by the government.

Question 4 - Crimes are being committed using guns. Do you:
A. Strengthen ties between the communities and law enforcement.
B. Create a national registry of guns and gun owners, thereby denying guns to potential criminals.

Question 5 - Women are getting abortions at higher rates. Do you:
A. Provide education on sex, abstinence, adoption, and family planning at healthcare centers.
B. Provide government funding of abortion.

Question 6 - The economy is not going well. Do you blame:
A. The government which provides businesses with incentives.
B. The rich bankers who control the flow of money.

Question 7 - A portion of the population disagrees with your policies. Do you:
A. Explain to them why your policies are better than the alternatives.
B. Fine or arrest persons who obstruct your policies.


Scoring
Give yourself one point for each answer of "A". Subtract one point for each answer of "B". If you come up with a negative score, CONGRATULATIONS! YOU ARE LITERALLY HITLER!


Explanation
Q1 - Hitler helped revive the country by massive infrastructure projects. By jumping on the popularity of the automobile, as well as the added mobility, Hitler made spectacles out of each road project. To increase the popularity of these infrastructure projects, Hitler also founded the "People's Car Company", or Volkswagen, to provide reasonable cost automobiles to the German people.

Q2 - While "Gardens of Children", or Kindergartens, were already being formed in the 1850's, it was the Nazis who instituted a public education system with the intent of alleviating the burden on households, while simultaneously doubling the available workforce by freeing the mothers to work outside the homes.

Q3 - Hospitals became parts of the state under Hitler. Since healthcare was free, people went to the doctor for anything, causing massive delays in care and bottlenecks in service. Doctors who were paid by the government did not make enough money to endure the massive need, so many left for Austria where they could set their own rates.

Q4 - The Weimar Republic created a gun registry, and the Nazis used it to take guns from the Jews. This left them defenseless when they came to load them on the trains.

Q5 - The Nazis were huge fans of eugenics and the use of abortion to control the population. Poor people, degenerates, gypsies, slavics, and jews were provided abortions in great numbers. The pure Germans, however, had programs to increase their rate of reproduction including one called Lebensborn, or "Wellspring of Life".

Q6 - The Nazis blamed the Jews, particularly jewish bankers, for their economic ruin following World War I. They began with boycotting their businesses, then with outright taking their money.

Q7 - The Jews, being the target of the Nazi's ire, were fined and arrested on any cause the Nazi's could concoct. (Very similar to the persecution of christian bakers of today who did not toe the party-line.)

Put up a fight dammit

I get flustered and come off brash. In crude terms, I can be an asshole. But it comes from a good place, out of compassion, I believe.

I so often talk to people who have set their minds to an idea, and they spend all their energies trying to reinforce those ideas, even when logic and all sense defies it. I try, even if I fail, to present them with reasons why they may be wrong. And I eagerly await their counterpoint because I don't believe that I'm right just because I believe something. I humor myself with a paraphrase Socrates (a la Plato) that I know more than most because I know that I know nothing. That's why I spend so much of my personal time looking into facts and figures; so when I see misinformation or plain ignorance, I have the opportunity to bring these people toward their own knowledge.

And I possibly get more flustered with someone of higher intelligence and education, as I hold them to a higher standard than I do most. I know they have the ability and capability to reach their own conclusions based on logic, reasoning, research, and facts. I recognize that may be unfair, but as someone once said, it may be "unfair, but not unjust." (Sidney Morgenbesser said this about the police hitting him while protesting the Vietnam war. It was unfair that he was hit, but not unjust as they hit everyone.)

More to the point, when I see someone of their obvious ability make such statements (as "Trump is clearly racist") but this conclusion appears based on bad data (in my opinion, of course), I feel obligated to challenge that belief. And too often, the response is self-reinforcing or attempts to twist logic to reinforce the original idea. You see, if I believed they lacked the ability to provide point-counterpoint, I wouldn't confront their ideas with as much vehemence.

For instance, when I pointed out the logical fallacy of "Trump's a racist", they do not immediately provide any evidence of their own. They often attack the logical fallacy. While I give them points for style, they get no credit for addressing the issue. When they do provide evidence, they come from a place of "My assumption is Trump's a racist. From that we can prove..." That is bad form and horrible logic.

So, if they say, "supporting Trump is to support racism," they have already implied that Trump himself is racist and will promulgate racist ideology. I then am forced to go through the assumed litany of charges against Trump which I assume are their arguments (since they did not provide their own). The charge of Trump's racism often stems from his position on illegal immigration. So, I address that his position is little different than those of Bill Clinton 20 years ago. Also, Trump's position on Middle Eastern refugees is often a source of accusation; so I addressed that. And so on. If I can show that Trumps political positions are not racist nor motivated by racism, then the support of those who are racist will have no sway over his policies.

If they do not present their own argument, I have to assume their arguments for them. That's not the way I like to have discussions. But if they only argue semantics and not facts, I have little other choice.

And I will not apologize for my brash tone or my offensive manner. I want them to get upset. I want them to convince me. I want them to bring their best reason and logic. But most of all, I want facts. And if they cannot provide those, I will continue to challenge their assertions.

Hysteria Over The "Risk" Of Being Poor

By Neal Boortz

Please stand back.  I’ve been waiting all weekend to write this particular section for Nealz Nuze.  Seldom have I heard a more idiotic statement from someone in a position to know better … I mean this is so magnificently ignorant – even stupid – that if this woman’s ignorance were radioactive Democrats could build the mother of all nuclear brain bombs.  Just one could wipe out all intelligent life on Earth.

The woman we’re talking about is Melissa Harris-Perry.  Apparently she has a weekend show on MSNBC.  No surprise there.  At last check MSNBC had about 2,200 centrifuges at work 24/7 trying to purify stupid.  They’ve done quite well with Melissa Harris Hyphen Perry.

Melissa Harris Hyphen Perry is also political science professor at Tulane.  Read a bit further and you’ll pity her poor students.

Melissa’s meltdown (Can I just call her Melissa?  The Harris Hyphen Perry is tiring) occurred on her show over this past weekend.  The topic had turned to welfare and income mobility.  Melissa apparently lost it when a guest on her show suggested that people move from lower to higher income brackets by taking risks.  Oh my!  Now THAT yanked Melissa’s chain.  She actually started screaming and thrashing about on the air like a beached barracuda.  Here’s a section from the transcript of her hysterical fit, provided by Hot Air:

“What is riskier than living poor in America?   Seriously! What in the world is riskier than being a poor person in America? I live in a neighborhood where people are shot on my street corner. I live in a neighborhood where people have to figure out how to get their kid into school because maybe it will be a good school and maybe it won’t. I am sick of the idea that being wealthy is risky. No. There is a huge safety net that whenever you fail will catch you and catch you and catch you. Being poor is what is risky. We have to create a safety net for poor people. And when we won’t, because they happen to look different from us, it is the pervasive ugliness.”

Where to start?  This is like hunting over a baited field.  So many targets standing completely still with stupid expressions on their faces that you scarcely know where to shoot first.  (OMG!  A gun methaphor!)

Let’s start with the poor.  The poor, poor, pitiful poor.  Just how risky is it to be poor in America?  Lose your job?  You’re on unemployment.  No job? You’re on welfare!  Can’t find something to eat?  Food banks and numerous feeding programs.  Just tell me when was the last time you heard of someone dying from hunger in this country.  You have to hide somewhere to do that.  No roof over your head?  Check in to a shelter.  Fact is, most people who sleep outside make that choice after rejecting a bed in a shelter because they don’t want to abide by the rules.  For every story of some poor person who died on a freezing night outdoors, there is a story of a bed in a shelter rejected.  Get sick?  Medicaid.  Nobody is denied basic life-saving medical care in this country because they can’t afford to pay for it.

What’s it like to be poor in America?  Dare I say it?  Not all that horrible, actually.  First – in a general sense – the average poor person in America has a higher standard of living than the average European.  Read that sentence again – you need to understand what I’m saying there.  Read it until it sinks in.  Take the average POOR person in America and tell them they’re going to have to live like the AVERAGE EUROPEAN .. and they’ll start screaming racism, discrimination, oppression, and every other leftist trigger word they can remember.  Tell a poor person in America that they’re going to have to lower their living standard to that of the average European, and the proggies will tell you that you be “hatin’” on the poor.

Specifics?  Yeah .. I have some specifics.

First .. let me go back to a story and picture that appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution earlier this year.  The story is re-written for use every winter --- it’s about pitiful po’ folks having to wait in line to get their home heating assistance dollars from the government to heat their homes in the winter.  This past winter the AJC showed a picture of some pitiful poor person bemoaning the fact that she might not get her heating dollars.  Right there in her living room we saw her big-screen television (at least 50”) and the PlayStation video game.  There was also a space heater in the background.  The AJC writer told us that sadly this woman can only afford to heat the room she is occupying.  Well … guess what the hell what?  That’s the way the average European does it!  In Europe many think it’s just plain silly to heat a room you are not using.  That’s also the way your parents or grandparents probably lived in this country.  You wouldn’t expect this AJC reporter to know that though.  The purpose of the story was to make your heart bleed for this pitiful poor woman, not to give you any actual facts.

Pretty risky stuff, right Melissa?

More specifics?  Here you go.  This is from a two-year old study from The Heritage Foundation. 

• The typical “poor” household in America has a car
• 78% of “poor” households in America have air conditioning
• 64% of “poor” households in America have cable or satellite TV .. most have two TVs, along with a DVD player and  VCR
• Most “poor” households in America with children have a gaming system such as an Xbox or PlayStation
• 38% of “poor” households in America have a personal computer
• Most “poor” households in America have a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. They also have other household appliances such as a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.
• The typical “poor” American has more living space than the average European.
• The typical “poor” American family is able to obtain medical care when needed.
• The average “poor” household in America claims to have sufficient funds to meet all essential needs.

One can only assume that in light of the growth of Obama’s entitlement society these numbers are even better now.

But wait!  (As they say.)  There’s more!

I’m about to show you that you have more disposable income in America as a single mother with three children – from God knows how many different fathers – than does a traditional two-parent middle class family.  Hold on.

Let’s consider the head of a household of four making minimum wage in America.  More specifically – a one-parent household of four.  The mom – making minimum wage – and three children.  Compare this to a two-parent household with two children making $60,000 a year.  Wyatt Emerich of The Cleveland Current ran the numbers on these two families and discovered that the single-mom with three kids,  and no job marketable job skills that she could use to earn more than minimum wage,  actually has --- now get this --- actually has more disposable income than the family making $60,000.  How does that work?  Well .. you throw in the various government income redistribution programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, food stamps, the school lunch program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, CHIP, Section 8 rent subsidies, and the heating assistance program and you have little Miss Minimum Wage – earning $14,500 a year – actually walking away with $37,777 in disposable income.  Meanwhile, the family earning $60,000, after taxes and childcare costs, brings home about $34,366. 

There, Melissa.  There’s your risky lifestyle.  Really?  Just where IS the risk you speak of?  Frankly, I don’t see that much at all.  It’s a life in thrall .. the government provides you with the security you so ardently desire in exchange for one simple little thing every two or four years … you’re vote. 

Do you want me to tell you about poor people and risk-taking?  Here you go:

• Having unprotected sex so that your boyfriend can knock you up, and then having a child you absolutely cannot afford to raise … that’s risky.

• Ignoring your education and job training opportunities to the point that you can’t qualify for a job that earns more than minimum wage … that’s risky.

• Getting hooked on drugs … that’s risky

• Spending your spare money on lottery tickets and at your local Tresses and Talons shop … that’s risky.

• Taking money you could use to buy your kids a book .. and spending it instead on a cool tattoo.  Risky.

• Getting a job --- and then making a habit of not showing up for work on Monday’s and Fridays … that’s risky. 

• Refusing to move out of a crime-ridden inner city environment and relocating, by whatever means necessary, to an area with better schools, less drugs and crime, and some basic job opportunities … that’s risky.  And don’t give me this “can’t afford it” crap.  Our ancestors did that walking alongside covered wagons with a few tables and chairs and maybe a bed inside.  They had to dig holes in the ground to drop a deuce along the way.  You have a car.  There’s rest areas on the expressways.  Load it and use it.

• Embracing the “no snitching” culture so that the police can’t do an effective job of ridding your neighborhood of the thugs that shoot your friends on street corners … risky. 

Now … dear, sweet, mindless Melissa.  You say that there’s no risk-taking in being wealthy?  Oh .. and that there’s a “huge safety net that will catch you whenever you fail over and over?”  Really?  Well .. you’re a political science professor .. so we’ll just assume you don’t know what in the hell you’re talking about.  Pretty safe assumption, I’d say. 

CNN’s Money.com tells us that households have lost a total of $16 trillion plus in household wealth since the recession.  Now this wasn’t wealth held by the pitiful poor.  By definition, they have no net wealth.  So where was the safety net for this $16 trillion in lost net wealth, Melissa?  Is the government out there making these people whole again?  Is the government restoring lost savings accounts?  How about depleted IRAs and 401Ks?  Being rich is risk-free? 

What of all the businessmen who have had to close down their businesses – their life’s dreams – as a result of the recession?  Where was that government safety net that catches them over and over and over?  Can you tell me one business lost to a small businessman that has been restored by government?  Can you tell me how the government stepped in and gave this businessman back the cash and time he invested in his business?  Isn’t it great that this guy wasn’t taking any risks? 

What about the stock losses in failed corporations?  What about the dividends no longer being paid by corporations on the financial brink?  Tell me, Melissa, how is the government stepping in to stretch a safety net under these investors?  Even The Huffington Post reports that wealth lost during the recession hit middle and upper income people the hardest.  Tell me what the government safety net did for them, Melissa?

Do you want to know what the safety net for the rich is?  It’s the exact same safety net your wonderful poor people have:  SNAP, Section 8, EITC, Child care tax credits, food banks, TANF and the rest of the social welfare programs that prop up your neighbors in that violent neighborhood you can’t bring yourself to leave. 

Don’t move, Melissa.  Trust me .. you’re right where you belong.  It’s nice they let you work in the house sometimes.  

---

source:
Hysteria Over The "Risk" Of Being Poor

how is this not racism?

The order created a “President’s Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for African Americans.” It will include senior officials from several federal agencies — including the Departments of Education, Justice and Labor — which have gained increased power over state education policies since 2009.

The progressives campaign for race-based discipline policies also won a victory in Maryland July 24.

The state’s board of education established a policy demanding that each racial or ethnic group receive roughly proportional level of school penalties, regardless of the behavior by members of each group.

The board’s decision requires that “the state’s 24 school systems track data to ensure that minority and special education students are not unduly affected by suspensions, expulsions and other disciplinary measures,” said a July 25 Washington Post report.

emphasis added

maybe i'm reading this wrong, but this means with two schools, one predominantly african-american, the other predominantly non-black (i.e. asian, latino, caucasian), where one school is vandalized, both schools must suspend or discipline an equal number of students, even though no vandalism ("regardless of the behavior") took place at the other school.

does this make ANY sense?

---

source:
Obama backs race-based school discipline policies | The Daily Caller

beautiful unique snowflake in a blizzard

You are not special. You are not exceptional.

Contrary to what your u9 soccer trophy suggests, your glowing seventh grade report card, despite every assurance of a certain corpulent purple dinosaur, that nice Mister Rogers and your batty Aunt Sylvia, no matter how often your maternal caped crusader has swooped in to save you… you're nothing special.

Across the country no fewer than 3.2 million seniors are graduating about now from more than 37,000 high schools. That's 37,000 valedictorians… 37,000 class presidents… 92,000 harmonizing altos… 340,000 swaggering jocks… 2,185,967 pairs of Uggs. But why limit ourselves to high school? After all, you're leaving it. So think about this: even if you're one in a million, on a planet of 6.8 billion that means there are nearly 7,000 people just like you.

You see, if everyone is special, then no one is. If everyone gets a trophy, trophies become meaningless.

Like accolades ought to be, the fulfilled life is a consequence, a gratifying byproduct. It's what happens when you're thinking about more important things. Climb the mountain not to plant your flag, but to embrace the challenge, enjoy the air and behold the view. Climb it so you can see the world, not so the world can see you. Go to Paris to be in Paris, not to cross it off your list and congratulate yourself for being worldly. Exercise free will and creative, independent thought not for the satisfactions they will bring you, but for the good they will do others, the rest of the 6.8 billion-and those who will follow them. And then you too will discover the great and curious truth of the human experience is that selflessness is the best thing you can do for yourself. The sweetest joys of life, then, come only with the recognition that you're not special.

---

source:
Full transcript: "You're Not Special" speech - Boston News, Weather, Sports | FOX 25 | MyFoxBoston

flake vs flake

a rebuttal from Mark Levin and Jeffrey Lord to George Stephanopolous's column. John Quincy Adams a Founding Father? Michele Bachmann Says Yes...

by Mark Levin on Tuesday, June 28, 2011 at 9:51am: "George Stephanopolous: Flake"

George Stephanopolous has revealed his own flakiness and ignorance in his effort to pile on Michele Bachmann.

The fact is that a number of prominent Founders did attempt to end or at least take on the issue of slavery, including Virginia's George Mason, who was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. The inability to end slavery was among the reasons he refused to support the Constitution. While he was a slave-owner, he nonetheless opposed the institution going forward. Mason was no light-weight, either. He had authored the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which later served as the basis for James Madison's draft of the Bill of Rights.

Thomas Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration specifically condemned the treatment of blacks by the Crown as a basis for America declaring its independent from Britain.

Importantly, the final draft of the Declaration that was adopted by all the states contained the crucial recognition of God-given unalienable rights that belonged to all human beings. The phrase was borrowed by Jefferson from philosopher John Locke, who was anti-slave.

---

By Jeffrey Lord on 6.28.11 @ 1:38PM - The American Spectator: "Levin: Stephanopoulos Is Foolish in Lecturing Bachmann"

"[A] French observer wrote that [James] Madison, "a young man (who)... astonishes…by his eloquence, his wisdom, and his genius, has had the humanity and courage (for such a proposition requires no small share of courage) to propose a general emancipation of the slaves." - James Madison, by biographer, Ralph Ketcham

'Hamilton became a prime mover in the early abolitionist group. He pressured the (New York) state legislature and helped to raise money to buy and free slaves. The society's founders…elected Hamilton chairman to draw up recommendations for "a line of conduct" for any "members who still possessed slaves." He also established a registry for manumitted slaves, listing their names and ages, "to detect attempts to deprive such manumitted persons of their liberty."' - Alexander Hamilton: A Life, by biographer Willard Sterne Randall

---

personally, i think they're both (George and Michelle) a bit flaky... i want news from my journalists... and i want legislation from congressmen(women)... journalists should know how to research and interview... congressmen should know law and history... it's clear that neither of these people can do their jobs.

proof is in the pudding

Let those crackers and hillbillies in the red states wallow in their filth and their ignorance, say proud upholders of the blue state model. We blue staters believe in things like quality education — and that costs money.

The American Interest blog

one thing this blog fails to point out is the proportion of magnet, private, charter, and preparatory schools who outrank your basic, public school... perhaps this is more reason to put public schools on notice... provide tax vouchers to parents and allow them to take their children to the schools that perform... stop rewarding mediocrity... it appears that "No Child Left Behind" is leaving too many children behind... it just gives the appearance of success by setting the bar lower.

how can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

School's food is the only option for some kids - chicagotribune.com

Little Village Academy on Chicago's West Side, students are not allowed to pack lunches from home. Unless they have a medical excuse, they must eat the food served in the cafeteria.

Any school that bans homemade lunches also puts more money in the pockets of the district's food provider, Chartwells-Thompson. The federal government pays the district for each free or reduced-price lunch taken, and the caterer receives a set fee from the district per lunch.

During a recent visit to the school, dozens of students took the lunch but threw most of it in the garbage uneaten.

how many rights are you willing to give up?

EAT THE RICH!

Is America really broke? Michael Moore (and others) tells us that there are oceans of cash being hoarded by the wealthy. But Iowahawk (iowahawk.typepad.com) did a little addition, and armed with these statistics Bill and the 'Hawk blow a hole in the "hoarding" lie big enough to fit a documentary filmmaker through.

and for the text version, go to Iowa Hawk's blog and read all about it.... have a nice day. :)

Kathy Griffin: 'Glee' Guest Star As Palin-Inspired Character?

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

my commentary:
i will be amazed if Griffin can play the part without being a bad caricature­... i'll be more suprised if she can act at all.

the only reason she has taken the part is to smear "Tea-Partiers" and conservatives... and that's the only reason Glee has cast her.

it's a sad statement when a show like Glee, a major theme of which is inclusiveness, decides that divisiveness is the way to get ratings.

i'm suprised that "white precious" comment gets so many laughs; especially here... she's calling Palin an overweight illiterate with a child out of wedlock... yet Glee has taken sympatheti­c stands on two of the three issues on their show... seems to me that Kathy is the antithesis of Glee.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

the joys of Sidney Morgenbesser

you would think i grew up listening to this guy... his sense of humor is a breath of fresh air to stagnant minds... enjoy this selection of Morgenbesser's more (in)famous quotations from Andrew Gumbel and the Independent:

The Independent, Professor Sidney Morgenbesser: Philosopher celebrated for his withering New York Jewish humour

Sidney Morgenbesser, philosopher: born New York 22 September 1921; died New York 2 August 2004.

Sidney Morgenbesser, Emeritus John Dewey Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University in New York, was celebrated for his extraordinarily quick wit, his deep irreverence and his ability to illuminate even the most complicated intellectual ideas with the street smarts of his upbringing on Manhattan's Lower East Side.

forgive the interruptions, while i editorialize...

He was the quintessential New York Jewish intellectual: Isaiah Berlin, Woody Allen and Isaac Bashevis Singer rolled into one. His stories and one-liners were not just appreciated at Columbia, where he was on faculty for half a century, but were part and parcel of university lectures delivered halfway around the world by professors who had never met him, but remained in awe.

Generations of philosophers and linguists have heard the story of the Columbia lecture in the 1950s in which the eminent Oxford philosopher J.L. Austin explained how many languages employ the double negative to denote a positive ("he is not unlike his sister"), but that no language employs a double positive to make a negative. Morgenbesser, sitting in the audience, waved his arm dismissively, and retorted: "Yeah, yeah."

funny how words are... a pleonasm (like "Yeah, yeah") is too many words used to express an idea, yet Morgenbesser could only express the idea by using them both... and, as an aside, the word neoplasm appears to be an anagram of pleonasm, and it is too many cells being used where fewer are needed... and a completely unrelated phrase, ad nauseum, still has that familiar tonal sound to both, and is the extreme of the idea; going on about a subject to the point of causing sickness... like i'm doing, now.

Asked by a student if he agreed with Mao's view that a statement can be both true and false at the same time, Morgenbesser replied: "Well I do and I don't."

Of the philosophy of pragmatism, on which he wrote and lectured, he once said: "It sounds good in theory, but it'll never work in practice."

Morgenbesser's reputation was at its height in the 1960s, when he joined the ranks of student protesters marching against the Vietnam War and got clubbed on the head for his pains. Asked what he made of his treatment, he said it was "unfair, but not unjust". Pressed for an explanation, he added: "It was unfair because they hit me over the head, but not unjust because they hit everyone else over the head."

it's curious that unjust and unfair are often thought of as synonyms... as Morgenbesser correctly points out, they are inequal... the treatment, while unfair (i.e. disproportionate, undue), was not unjust (i.e. prejudiced, biased)... everyone was treated unfairly equally.

Another unfortunate encounter with the police occurred when he lit up his pipe on the way out of a subway station. Morgenbesser protested to the officer who tried to stop him that the rules covered smoking in the station, not outside. The cop conceded he had a point, but said: "If I let you get away with it, I'd have to let everyone get away with it." To which Morgenbesser, in a famously misunderstood line, retorted: "Who do you think you are, Kant?" Hauled off to the precinct lock-up, Morgenbesser only won his freedom after a colleague showed up and explained the Categorical Imperative to the nonplussed boys in blue.

Kant can be a heavy subject... you should never assume other people know Kant... in reality, you shouldn't assume to know Kant, yourself... unless, you're only using him as a means to an end.

It was such episodes that caused the philosopher Robert Nozick to write that he "majored in Sidney Morgenbesser". Larry George, a political science professor at California State University in Long Beach who never met the man, commented:

When I first heard the now canonical Morgenbesser anecdotes in graduate school, I thought he was some kind of a Talmudic tall tale . . . created to intimidate and inspire us more sluggish thinkers.

Morgenbesser learned the fine art of kibitzing from his father, a garment worker in the Lower East Side of New York who can never have suspected how Jewish humour could be so witheringly applied to metaphysics and epistemology. Sidney Morgenbesser trained to be a rabbi before switching to academia, studying at the City College of New York, then the University of Pennsylvania. After teaching at Swarthmore College and the New School of Social Research, he joined the Department of Philosophy at Columbia in 1954, where he remained until retirement in 1990. For much of his career, he was on the editorial board of the Journal of Philosophy and he built up expertise on the philosophy of science, the theory of knowledge, pragmatism and human rights. He was, however, notably restrained in his publishing habits. As he once wisecracked: "Moses wrote one book. Then what did he do?"

wrote a book; founded a nation; freed an entire people (not necessarily in that order)... other than that, nothing.

Towards the end of his final long illness, he asked another Columbia philosopher, David Albert: "Why is God making me suffer so much? Just because I don't believe in him?"

that, often, is the case, dear sir... or, alternatively, our lack of belief in the morals written of in Moses's "one book" often leads us into much suffering... however, in your case, i believe, it was simply symptomatic of end-of-life; something our bodies (and oft, minds) is loath to do.

Sidney Morgenbesser; you shall be missed.

trapped in chinese finger cuffs

Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior by Amy Chua

What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences.

Chinese parents demand perfect grades because they believe that their child can get them. If their child doesn't get them, the Chinese parent assumes it's because the child didn't work hard enough.

Chinese parents believe that their kids owe them everything. The reason for this is a little unclear, but it's probably a combination of Confucian filial piety and the fact that the parents have sacrificed and done so much for their children.

Chinese parents believe that they know what is best for their children and therefore override all of their children's own desires and preferences.

there is a lot to be said for believing in your children... and believing that they are good/better/best... and pushing them to be everything they can be, and exceeding their own expectations.

but, then again:
China's suicide rate among world's highest
Chinese Commit Suicide Every Two Minutes

... if they survive, they'll be AWESOME!

illegal people

i keep hearing these bleeding-heart liberal types saying the most moronic things... the one i've heard lately is really bad... not only does it show their methodology of changing the framework of an argument to meet their own narrow-minded needs, but of their outright ignorance and, yes, stupidity... they say:

Don't call them "illegal immigrants". That's not right. A person cannot be illegal. Human beings cannot be illegal.

here's my "polite" response, which i used on the comment portion of a news article... feel free to use it:

Wow... you really read that as "the person himself/herself is illegal"?
Maybe english is your second language, but the term "illegal" is an adjective to the noun, "immigrant", thus modifying the person's immigrant status. If they said, "Garcia, an experienced lumberjack," then you would not criticize the writer for implying that Garcia is experienced at being a person, would you? Garcia is an immigrant. As an immigrant, her status as an immigrant is "undocumented", which is illegal.

my "not-so-polite" response, i don't recommend using...

Nazi Party Platform

1. We demand the unification of all Germans in the Greater Germany on the basis of the right of self-determination of peoples.


2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to the other nations; abrogation of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the sustenance of our people, and colonization for our surplus population.

4 Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.

5. Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in Germany only as a guest, and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners.

6. The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county or municipality, be filled only by citizens. We combat the corrupting parliamentary economy, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities.

7. We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens. If it is impossible to sustain the total population of the State, then the members of foreign nations (non-citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.

8. Any further immigration of non-citizens is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who have immigrated to Germany since the 2 August 1914, be forced immediately to leave the Reich.

9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all Consequently we demand:

11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery.

12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).

14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.

15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.

16. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.

17. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land.

18. We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, Schieber and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.

19. We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order.

20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbuergerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.

21. The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.

22. We demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army.

23. We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press. In order to enable the provision of a German press, we demand, that:

a. All writers and employees of the newspapers appearing in the German language be members of the race;

b. Non-German newspapers be required to have the express permission of the State to be published. They may not be printed in the German language;

c. Non-Germans are forbidden by law any financial interest in German publications, or any influence on them, and as punishment for violations the closing of such a publication as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-German concerned. Publications which are counter to the general good are to be forbidden. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms which exert a destructive influence on our national life, and the closure of organizations opposing the above made demands.

24. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: The Common Good before the individual good.

25. For the execution of all of this we demand the formation of a strong central power in the Reich. Unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich and its organizations in general. The forming of state and profession chambers for the execution of the laws made by the Reich within the various states of the confederation. The leaders of the Party promise, if necessary by sacrificing their own lives, to support by the execution of the points set forth above without consideration.

[emphasis added]

B.Arch vs. M.Arch

B.Arch vs. M.Arch