There are a great many weird subjects in the news at the moment. Some of them are astonishing while others are just strange. All of them are things that would have been inconceivable just a few years ago.
My favorite of these stories is the current debate in the UK as to whether or not Britain is a Christian country. There is actually a discussion on that point between the Prime Minister and the former Archbishop of Canterbury (who is the highest ranking prelate in the Church of England). The odd thing is that the archbishop is arguing that Britain is now a post-Christian nation while the PM says that Britain remains a Christian nation. What's next? Will the Pope announce that everyone is now a Buddhist?
Another of these strange debates centers on Harry Reid. To be fair, Harry Reid and strange go together like peanut butter and jelly, but still, one has to wonder how this came about. When the Bureau of Land Management decided to throw a rancher off the land his family has used for more than a century, the feds brought all sorts of armed men including snipers to the site to deal with the situation. The government spent something like twenty million dollars in what was supposedly an effort to collect less than a million dollars in grazing fees. A bunch of the rancher's neighbors showed up at the scene and protested the government's strong arm tactics. They were particularly troubled by the presence of the snipers. Harry Reid's response was to charge that the rancher and his neighbors were "domestic terrorists" even though it was the feds who brought the snipers and other armed men. I could understand it if Reid said that he favored the enforcement of the law or made some other statement supporting a resolution, but "domestic terrorists"? Really?
I guess I have to add that the rancher made some stupid comments about African Americans, slavery and government handouts after the feds left. That doesn't change just how strange Reid's comments were.
Another strange item in the news was the reaction of the State Department spokesman when she was asked to list the accomplishments of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Jen Psaki, the spokesman, was unable to come up with even one item to list. It seems inconceivable that a Washington flack would be caught so flatfooted with a question like that.
Another strange thing (or series of strange things) happens each time John Kerry makes another pronouncement about foreign policy. In just the last few days, Kerry has managed to undermine his efforts to keep Israel and the Palestinians talking just by opening his own mouth. Kerry told a group in Europe that Israel risked becoming an apartheid nation if it did not make peace. The statement is unbelievable. Apartheid was the South African practice of strict racial separation and second class citizenship for blacks in that nation. In Israel, there is neither racial or religious separation; nor are there differences in treatment of Jews and others -- with one exception: Arabs, unlike Jews, are not subject to compulsory military service. The charge of "apartheid" is one of those slogans common in the Islamic world that have little relation to reality. Kerry's repeating it is the rough equivalent of the Israeli foreign minister announcing in Europe that unless America changes its policies, it really is the Great Satan. Without a doubt, there are people in the USA and in Israel who may fall for these phony charges, but one would think that the head of America's foreign policy would be smart enough not to do so. Of course, Kerry is probably the dumbest secretary of state in my lifetime. (He's not the dumbest member of Obama's cabinet; that distinction goes to Chuck Hagel.) For those who follow Kerry's idiot statements, you have to add that Kerry not only insulted the Israelis big time with his stupid remark, but that he did it on the day set aside each year to remember the Holocaust. So when Israel was busy with its remembrance of millions of Jews being killed by the Nazis in the name of racial purity, Kerry was out there basically calling the Israelis the rough equivalent of the Nazis. The man is a moron.
Then there's the big debate about the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers. He too made some racist remarks to his former girlfriend which she taped and released or sold to the press. The debate at the moment seems to center on whether or not the owner respects African Americans. Huh? No matter what the guy said, he has owned the Clippers for decades and during that time he has paid enormous salaries to players who were overwhelmingly African American. So this guy is responsible for making more than 100 African Americans into multi-millionaires. Money is not everything, but it certainly helps! The guy clearly respects his players. He also happens to have a big mouth and says things that he clearly should not.
My favorite of these stories is the current debate in the UK as to whether or not Britain is a Christian country. There is actually a discussion on that point between the Prime Minister and the former Archbishop of Canterbury (who is the highest ranking prelate in the Church of England). The odd thing is that the archbishop is arguing that Britain is now a post-Christian nation while the PM says that Britain remains a Christian nation. What's next? Will the Pope announce that everyone is now a Buddhist?
Another of these strange debates centers on Harry Reid. To be fair, Harry Reid and strange go together like peanut butter and jelly, but still, one has to wonder how this came about. When the Bureau of Land Management decided to throw a rancher off the land his family has used for more than a century, the feds brought all sorts of armed men including snipers to the site to deal with the situation. The government spent something like twenty million dollars in what was supposedly an effort to collect less than a million dollars in grazing fees. A bunch of the rancher's neighbors showed up at the scene and protested the government's strong arm tactics. They were particularly troubled by the presence of the snipers. Harry Reid's response was to charge that the rancher and his neighbors were "domestic terrorists" even though it was the feds who brought the snipers and other armed men. I could understand it if Reid said that he favored the enforcement of the law or made some other statement supporting a resolution, but "domestic terrorists"? Really?
I guess I have to add that the rancher made some stupid comments about African Americans, slavery and government handouts after the feds left. That doesn't change just how strange Reid's comments were.
Another strange item in the news was the reaction of the State Department spokesman when she was asked to list the accomplishments of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Jen Psaki, the spokesman, was unable to come up with even one item to list. It seems inconceivable that a Washington flack would be caught so flatfooted with a question like that.
Another strange thing (or series of strange things) happens each time John Kerry makes another pronouncement about foreign policy. In just the last few days, Kerry has managed to undermine his efforts to keep Israel and the Palestinians talking just by opening his own mouth. Kerry told a group in Europe that Israel risked becoming an apartheid nation if it did not make peace. The statement is unbelievable. Apartheid was the South African practice of strict racial separation and second class citizenship for blacks in that nation. In Israel, there is neither racial or religious separation; nor are there differences in treatment of Jews and others -- with one exception: Arabs, unlike Jews, are not subject to compulsory military service. The charge of "apartheid" is one of those slogans common in the Islamic world that have little relation to reality. Kerry's repeating it is the rough equivalent of the Israeli foreign minister announcing in Europe that unless America changes its policies, it really is the Great Satan. Without a doubt, there are people in the USA and in Israel who may fall for these phony charges, but one would think that the head of America's foreign policy would be smart enough not to do so. Of course, Kerry is probably the dumbest secretary of state in my lifetime. (He's not the dumbest member of Obama's cabinet; that distinction goes to Chuck Hagel.) For those who follow Kerry's idiot statements, you have to add that Kerry not only insulted the Israelis big time with his stupid remark, but that he did it on the day set aside each year to remember the Holocaust. So when Israel was busy with its remembrance of millions of Jews being killed by the Nazis in the name of racial purity, Kerry was out there basically calling the Israelis the rough equivalent of the Nazis. The man is a moron.
Then there's the big debate about the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers. He too made some racist remarks to his former girlfriend which she taped and released or sold to the press. The debate at the moment seems to center on whether or not the owner respects African Americans. Huh? No matter what the guy said, he has owned the Clippers for decades and during that time he has paid enormous salaries to players who were overwhelmingly African American. So this guy is responsible for making more than 100 African Americans into multi-millionaires. Money is not everything, but it certainly helps! The guy clearly respects his players. He also happens to have a big mouth and says things that he clearly should not.
No comments:
Post a Comment