Art of the Day

The new "Greatest Tea Party Sign".

I learned something today

I've been an inveterate Warren Harding basher for as long as I've been politically aware. The man who let Teapot Dome happen under his nose wasn't worth my admiration, I thought.

I'm a little confused after having read this article, however, which paints a picture of Harding utterly unlike those I've seen before. The article analyzes Harding's handling of the Depression of 1920. I know -- I hadn't heard of it, either.

Turns out there was a massive economic downturn after WWI, as the country ratcheted down from wartime production levels and the Fed raised rates from abnormally low wartime levels. According to this account, the contraction was worse even than the one we're currently experiencing. Harding's response? Do nothing. I'd ordinarily think that response the result of his ignorance and indolence, but the man's own words don't allow that impression.

“I would be blind to the responsibilities that mark this fateful hour if I did not caution the wage-earners of America that mounting wages and decreased production can lead only to industrial and economic ruin.”

Pure, clear reason.

And later, condemning inflation,

“Gross expansion of currency and credit have depreciated the dollar just as expansion and inflation have discredited the coins of the world. We inflated in haste, we must deflate in deliberation. We debased the dollar in reckless finance, we must restore in honesty.”

If only our current leaders had a tenth of the honesty and forthright courage evidenced in these words.

And this, which is by far the most impressive quote included in this article, regarding the nature of the rough recovery,

“All the penalties will not be light, nor evenly distributed. There is no way of making them so. There is no instant step from disorder to order. We must face a condition of grim reality, charge off our losses and start afresh. It is the oldest lesson of civilization. … No altered system will work a miracle. Any wild experiment will only add to the confusion. Our best assurance lies in efficient administration of our proven system.”

No man who talked like that could be the sham of a president that I've been led to believe Harding was. The Teapot Dome scandal was terrible, but it seems that there's more to Warren G. Harding than his woefully inadequate oversight of the management of the Wyoming oil fields.

If these quotes at all reflect the mind and perspective of Warren Harding, I would MUCH rather he were my president now than Barack "We're all in this together -- well, except for the rich, who have to pay for everyone else" Obama.

The Pope clearly gets it

Not that that's much of a surprise. He's the Pope, after all.

Still, it was encouraging to see this report about his meeting with a contingent of Argentinian bishops where he basically told them to focus on people's souls, not on political activism:

After then encouraging them to stimulate "the practice of charity, especially among the most needy" in their dioceses, the Pope highlighted the importance of concentrating on "prayer as opposed to activism or a secularised vision of the charitable efforts of Christians. This assiduous contact with Christ through prayer will transform believers' hearts, opening them to the needs of others and so ensuring they are not 'inspired by ideologies aimed at improving the world, but guided by the faith which works through love'".

It's good to see how Pope Benedict understands this, and even better to see that he wants to make sure that Latin American Catholics understand it, too.

In The Faithful Departed, Philip Lawler lays out the pitiful state of Latin America's clergy by recounting his friend's words about how Latin American lay Catholics think: "If you want to start a union, find a priest. If you want spiritual counsel, find a Protestant pastor." Not for naught was John Paul II so suspicious of Liberation Theology. If it doesn't outright teach people to look for salvation in this world (usually through social or political activism), it at least strongly encourages people to do so.

But that message directly contradicts the life and witness of Christ, who repeatedly taught that his kingdom was "not of this world", and that he doesn't give peace "as the world gives", who explicitly refused to accept any kind of political power (even running away from ardent followers if he had to), and who was killed in large part because he didn't bring political peace -- something 1st century Jews expected the legitimate Messiah to do.

But Christ's peace is in people's hearts, an infinitely more difficult place to achieve peace than in the world. His kingdom is in heaven, which is the ultimate reality, the "real world". It is for that world that the Church is supposed to be preparing people, and too many Catholics (often on the Left, but increasingly on the Right as well in the aftermath of nonsense like "compassionate conservatism") have lost sight of that fact.

More courageous truth-telling from Geert Wilders

Geert Wilders, the head of the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, has been a stalwart critic of the Islamization of Europe. I've blogged about him before. He's a courageous man, and much to be admired.

He recently gave another major speech on the threat of Islam in Europe (at the Free Speech Summit in Palm Beach, FL), and it's a doozy. Lots of great stuff.

Maybe you see immigration as something that is inherently good for our country as it contributed so much for the United States, and I understand that. But Ladies and Gentleman the Europe as you know it from visiting Europe or from stories from your parents or friends or whoever, is on the verge of collapsing.

We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe's destiny and might send the Continent in what Ronald Reagan once called: "A thousand years of darkness. ...

As the Turkish Prime Minister Mr. Erdoğan once rightfully said: "There is no moderate Islam, Islam is Islam." ...

Ladies and Gentlemen, Islam has always intended to conquer Europe and it has done so for centuries.

The Christian city of Constantinople fell in the 15 century and now in the 21st century. Islam is trying again, but this time, not with Armies, but through the application of AlHaya the Islamic doctrine of migration. ...

Ladies and Gentlemen AlHaya may be the end of the western civilisation as we know it, for Islam is not coming to our societies to integrate or to assimilate but wants to dominate, and wants to submit us all, and the most dramatic situation is the one in Europe today.

My country is in the process of becoming Hollandistan as Europe is becoming in the process of becoming Eurabia. Only 12% of the German Muslims see themselves more German than Muslims, and churches throughout Europe are emptying out whereas Mosques are shooting up like mushrooms. Many evil phenomena such as Burqas, honour killings, female genitalia mutilations are becoming more and more prevalent.. Sharia testaments, Sharia mortgages, Sharia schools, Sharia banks, Sharia courts and even sharia Barbie dolls - Europe has them all today.

And I have not even mentioned the fact that for instance 70% of all crimes in the European city like Copenhagen are committed by Muslims. Indeed, we let in the Trojan Horse and the free World is now facing a Stealh Jihad, the Islamic attempt to introduce Sharia Law, bit by bit.

And here's the kicker:

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am often asked whether I have any answers to all the problems that I mention or what those answers might be. Well, let me tell you, I certainly have a lot of answers. Here are a few things that I believe we should do in the West, to stop the Islamization.

First, I have already said it, we have to stop the idea of 'Cultural Relativism'. Get rid of the misconception that all cultures are equal. They are not. Our culture based on Christianity, on Judeaism and Humanism is far better than the Islamic culture. So we should stop it.

We should also stop pretending that Islam is a religion. Sure, it has religious symbols, but it's not a religion. It is a totaltarian ideology and the right to religious freedom should not apply to Islam.

We should stop the mass immigration from Muslim countries. We have to stop it, today. No more immigrants from Muslim countries. We have to stop the Al Haya.

We have to encourage the voluntary repatriation. We have to expel criminals. We have to expel criminals with dual nationality even if we have to de-naturalize them and send them back to their homelands. I think we need a European First Amendment to strengthen our freedom of speech.

Must-read stuff. Check out the whole speech.

How D-Day would be covered today

The 65th anniversary of D-Day is about 6 weeks away. Still, I thought this post was pretty hilarious. It's a parody detailing how D-Day would be covered today. It's a little too pro-Bush in terms of the strained parallels drawn between the Iraq War and the invasion of Normandy, but it's still worth reading:

NORMANDY, FRANCE (June 6, 1944) Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more were wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children. Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops.

Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated, and that reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason, "said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."

The invasion also caused severe environmental damage. American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically-sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, thus threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised.

"This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought," said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all about corporate greed." Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded, said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows that President Roosevelt has ties to 'big beer'," said Pierre LeWimp. "Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."

Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon -- a so-called "atomic bomb." Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before, and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending two long weekends in Germany.

Shortly after the invasion began, reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by American soldiers. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at their so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored, but so far this remains unproven. Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion, and French officials are concerned that the uncollected corpses will pose a public-health risk. "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess, and we don't intend to help clean it up."

Well, that didn't take long, either

I realize that I'm late to the party with this one (although I've meant to write about it for the past 10 days), but I'll post about it anyway.

Let the record show that April 16, 2009 was the date when folks on the Left began equating opposition to Obama with racism.

Given the identify politics that pervades the Left, this reaction was almost inevitable, quite frankly. (One of the most interesting aspects of the competition for the 2008 Democratic nomination was watching which victims group would prevail -- women or blacks. It turns out that criticizing blacks is ultimately more verboten than criticizing women [as the reaction to Geraldine Ferraro's honest and accurate comments demonstrated].)

This is where Liberal overreach will occur -- on this issue. If Obama is smart, he will rein in talk of opposition to him being racist. (Although, he hasn't reined in the talk of opposition to him being terrorist, so who knows if he'll be that smart?) If he isn't proactive about that, though, most Americans will tire of this criticism and will turn on him. Give it a year, maybe two. If this the Left doesn't stop blaring its honest opinions about this crap, it will happen.

Pay attention to the dissenters

Talking about the Tea Parties (protesting high taxes, wasteful government spending, and unconscionably high deficits) across the country 11 days ago, Ross Douthat made a good point:

They resemble nothing so much as the anti-war protests during Bush's first term. ...

[A]nd just as George W. Bush benefited from having opposition to his policies identified with peacenik marchers in Berkeley and Ann Arbor, so Barack Obama probably benefits from having the opposition (such as it is) associated with a bunch of Fox News fans marching through the streets on Tax Day, parroting talk radio tropes and shouting about socialism. ...

Still, here we are in the sixth year of the Iraq War, and all those anti-war protests, their excesses and stupidities notwithstanding, look a lot more prescient in hindsight than they did (to me, at least) when they were going on. So if you're inclined to sneer and giggle at the Tea Parties, keep in mind that just because a group of protesters looks ragged, resentful, and naive, that doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong to be alarmed:

I'd say that the protests, which were largely peaceful, respectful affairs, are filled with folks who are neither ragged nor naive. They sure as hell are resentful, though. As well they should be.

Bush was a very popular president, once. Many folks forget, since he was so radioactive by the time he left, but Bush's approval ratings were well above 65% for more than two years. Currently, Obama's rating is between 60-65%. Of course, having the media in the tank for him should help him initially. As time passes, though, I expect Americans -- even Liberal dittoheads -- to weary of the Soviet-style adoration that every network besides Fox gives him. As Bush found out, nemesis always follows hubris.