« Google's choice on Memorial Day | Main | Slip of the tongue? Yeah, sure, uh huh »

May 31, 2006

The goal of surgery is to cut people

Come on now, you know it's true. Surgeons deliberately cut people. Sometimes people even die. You can't have surgery without the cutting so it must be the goal of surgery.

What? You find something wrong with that? You want to argue that while cutting indeed happens it isn't "the" goal of surgery?

Relativist. Cutmongerer. Hater of health. Fascist.

Yet, Andy Rooney, he of the beetle eyebrows, basset-hound face and grating folksy patter, says "The goal of war is to cause death to other people."*

Here is a man who was a reporter in WWII, that saw up close and personal the utter ugliness of war and today declares that ugliness is war's goal. How easy to dismiss the ovens and the ditches and the Bataan Death march. We who would war have only one priority.Kill people.

Frankly, I'm astounded at a so-called Memorial Day commentary that is so dismissive of the difficult and hard choices we face when we decide to war. Rooney has willed himself into a front porch rocking chair of gauzy pronouncements, untethered to reality.

I wish we could dedicate Memorial Day, not to the memory of those who have died at war, but to the idea of saving the lives of the young people who are going to die in the future if we don’t find some new way - some new religion maybe - that takes war out of our lives.
Stunningly, Rooney has so little grasp on current events he doesn't know his question has already been answered. That's the crux of our current dilemma, Andy. From Osama to Hamas to most recently, Ahmadinejad, they have given us a clear path to Worldwide Peace(tm).

It's called surrender and conversion.

Try to remember, Andy. That's what Hitler offered Chamberlain. It's what all fascists/communists/authoritarians/collectivists/totalitarians offer from time to time. There you find the goal of others who find there is no other way to respond to these demands but war.

Technorati: , ,

Posted by Darleen at May 31, 2006 12:17 PM


Some choice. We can kill you now or you can surrender and we will kill you at a more convenient time.

Maybe Andy should live out last few years in Fargo or De Moines or someplace where real people live.

Good Post.

Posted by: Yolo Cowboy at May 31, 2006 04:09 PM


I believe you have overlooked Rooney's larger point; the goal of every war is "victory," which is perhaps best defined as the surrender (and or conversion, or better, death) of the enemy. The means by which this goal is achieved is, of course, by causing as much death as possible, thereby instilling fear and humiliation to the enemy populace. Were I his editor, I would have asked that Rooney replace "goal" with "method."

But what is his larger point? I'd offer that it is twofold: one, that Memorial Day is not celebrated by most Americans in the way that it should be. A point that I think you'd find yourself in agreement with Rooney.

Second point? Found in the sentence preceding the one you chose to focus on:

There is more bravery at war than in peace, and it seems wrong that we have so often saved this virtue to use for our least noble activity - war

You write of "difficult and hard choices" when it comes to war. It's so easy to go to war, however.
It's much harder for a nation to find an alternative solution: one which doesn't involve so much death and destruction.

Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2006 05:45 PM

"It's so easy to go to war". Ahh the young, when life is so simple and immutable.

- If you really believe that statement I'll no longer take you seriously Bradley, even with angry retort. You simply have a lot more living too do. Thats the kindest way I can put it.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at May 31, 2006 06:17 PM

Hey shithead.

To quote someone with far more experience in war than you will ever have, John Kerry: "We should never go to war because we want to; we should only go because we have to."

p.s. And we're supposed to take seriously someone who goes by the moniker "big bang hunter"?

Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2006 06:48 PM

By the way, BBH : you have an awful, awful lot of free time. DO you have a job?

Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2006 06:53 PM

I don't know about you, Brad, but I don't "celebrate" Memorial Day. I remember it as I do the anniversary of the death of loved family members or friends. I remember it as I do 9/11.

There certainly is bravery in peace when one has to stand up and declare what is a just peace and then do the hard work to achieve it.

As the Midrash says

He who is merciful to the cruel will end up being cruel to the merciful.

Rooney, Chomsky, Jhimmi Carter, Murtha, et al, in their effort to be "kind" and "understanding" to America's enemies, end up dismissing America's own patriots and allies.

Posted by: Darleen at May 31, 2006 07:01 PM


I was in high school during Kerry's "Winter Soldier" slander. I didn't then, and I certainly don't now, put ANY credence in anything that that self-aggrandizing gigilo has to say.

You are having shortterm memory loss if you think our war with Islamism is a war we "wanted".

Posted by: Darleen at May 31, 2006 07:04 PM

I was in high school during Kerry's "Winter Soldier" slander. I didn't then, and I certainly don't now, put ANY credence in anything that that self-aggrandizing gigilo has to say.

I don't know about you, Darleen, but my opinions are based on a little reading and research, not what I thought about some news story I heard in high school.

If that was a Winter Soldier "slander" then more than one soldier was conspiring. After all,
71 of 105 Vietnam vets who testified there were eyewitnesses to war crimes.

You might also want to check out this book, especially in light of the recent revelations from Haditha. What was that thing Santayana said about history?

Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2006 07:27 PM

Oh, and another thing.

You're still conflating the Iraq war with the War on Terror. I know it's hard to separate the two things (especially after we removed a secular dictator and created a power vacuum which was promptly filled by chaos and a terrorist
training ground), but please try. or at least, could you try harder than those on the Right like Tony Snow who actually get paid by the Administration to write such things?

Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2006 07:35 PM

Kerry - heh.... He has a great deal more experience than I do when it comes to shooting himself in the ass with granade launchers. He was so unhappy with his first try, he went back and did it again.

- Just for the record I can't believe you're still tooting the horn for that lying asshole. You're way behind the power curve little buckaroo. All my Liberal friends wish they'd never heard of him. They think he was a fucking disaster, and they would be right. One guy got so exasperated he even emailed him a copy of that form 180. Give it up. Old news. You're just making yourself look foolish.

- And as far as how I choose to spend my time, I think you would be better served to just worry about yourself. From the things you write I'd say you have your hands full.

- By the way your mommy should have taught you that vulgerisms are generally the first sign you've lost the debate. You're still not to be taken seriously.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at May 31, 2006 09:08 PM

BTW - Heres something else to make your day while you're busy picking lint out your navel, and dreaming of Utopia. A lot of us Independents think that Bush didn't win the election, Kerry lost it for you. If you'd have run a candidate that at least didn't have such a false and checkered past, replete with a covered up dishonerable discharge, and a war record he couldn't make public, you could have won. Bush wasn't that popular. He was just better than that grubhead. But you probably already know that.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at May 31, 2006 09:30 PM

Darleen, I think you ought to be let in on the secret. Bush lied about WMDs. That has been proven and it has been pronounced by those that were weapons inspectors. There is so much out there acknowedging the lies that led us into war compliments of the Propagander-n-Thief. There was not a single Iraqi in the WTC attacks. I don't know why it doesn't bother you. It is no less than a full-blown war crime. Of course our policies still have a plentitude of other war crimes besides. War was not necessary. It is a horror that the rest of this globe realizes was unnecessary.

Also, the swift boat veterans for "truth" have been proven as liars. The vets standing behind Kerry are the ones on the boat with him. A tiny boat, by the way.

Speaking of lies, I have a book I'm getting ready to read right now by a fellow by the name of David Brock. His book is "Blinded by the Right" He was a conservative writer and sincerely conservative for many years. Then, he realized that the conservative movement has gone so so far down the moral shit hole, that he abandoned it, and exposed that there are so many lies that are perpetuated by the powerful right wing that have also been buying up the media since the eighties, and NOW the vast majority of MSM and radio stations are owned by the phenomenally wealthy that are benefiting off of Bush's policies. Very ugly back scratching party at the expense of the American people. So David Brock's main point in the book is that the conservative movement has gone so low that lying is standard routine with their many many shills. Brock admitted he among many others was part of it. He grew himself a conscience though.

Also, Karl Rove is as despicable as anyone ever could be. Doubtful you know much about his history. You are one that lets the MSM think for you. You also probably think CNN is liberal. LOL

You should see who owns the media. Do some research. Rupert Murdoch backs the PNAC. Do you know what that is?

You really need to start checking out some of the alternative media that isn't dependent on the huge corporate sponsors that are also dependent on the bought government (the right-wing controlled government that is mostly).

Posted by: blubonnet at May 31, 2006 11:32 PM

"Also, the swift boat veterans for "truth" have been proven as liars. The vets standing behind Kerry are the ones on the boat with him. A tiny boat, by the way."

- Gee blu,I guess you can only be a war hero if you're a Liberal....and...and..... that must mean the TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY SIX war veterens, most decorated, are all a pack of liars.Huh....Damn..... who would have thought...

- I think you'll find that the only person proven a liar is Kerry himself. O'Neill has offered to meet him in court, any time, any place, to settle it once and for all. Kerry won't respond. Its been 2+ years and he keeps making noises and ducking the issue....Still no form 180...

- Theres one simple reason he'll never do that form 180. He can't redact his dishonerable discharge. Yes he got a pardon from Jhimmi, but the record still stands, and he can't remove it without penalty of law, so you'll never see it.

- Same reason he'll never go to court. He'd have to produce all records.

- How many things do you lefties have to have shoved in your face before you wake up. You natter on and on about supposed right wing conspiracies. But a man who spins a pack of lies, dreams about being in a country he can't have been because theres no place to take a boat, cursing a president who hasn't been elected yet...you can't see that right under your nose.... Whats wrong with this picture?

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at May 31, 2006 11:57 PM

JAYSUS keerist, blu! I gave you a head's up with the Drew Troll graphic but here you are ... tossing up every bit of Left cultbot talking points.

GW "lied" about WMD? Then so did Clinton, Gore, Albright, Congresscritters, and just about every Western leader.

Lying is a positive act. Being wrong is not lying.

Lying is standing on the Senate floor and talking about the "searing memory" of being in Cambodia at Christmas when all EVIDENCE later points out that one's story is time/space impossible.

Lying is Jesse MacBeth and Micah Wright.

Posted by: Darleen at June 1, 2006 06:58 AM

If the goal of war is to kill people, bring out the nukes and let's end this damn thing once and for all. Show Iran how it's done, so to speak.

Posted by: Feisty at June 1, 2006 07:59 AM

Feisty - You just sent any and all Lefties visiting here, running to their analysts in all out panic.....*chuckle*

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 1, 2006 08:12 AM

From Osama to Hamas to most recently, Ahmadinejad, they have given us a clear path to Worldwide Peace(tm).

It's called surrender and conversion.

Indeed. Had we not invaded Iraq, we'd all be speaking Arabic and praying to Mecca today. True story.

Posted by: Josh at June 1, 2006 08:20 AM

In other words:


Posted by: Strider at June 1, 2006 11:13 AM

blubonnet said:

"There is so much out there acknowedging the lies that led us into war compliments of the Propagander-n-Thief. There was not a single Iraqi in the WTC attacks. I don't know why it doesn't bother you. It is no less than a full-blown war crime."

Please show me the quote where Bush claimed that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by Iraqis. Perhaps in the effort to find it, you'll actually learn something by reading the President's actual words.

Blu, there are only two possibilities here: either you are a LIAR, or you are mistaken. That's a lot more credit than you're willing to give President Bush.

Posted by: Strider at June 1, 2006 11:24 AM

Agreed, Strider. Probably no lies here. Just willful blindness and standard-issue spin. Everyday politics, in other words. Bit of a pity that the standard isn't any higher for decisions like going to war than for say, explaining why your treasury secretary got canned.


Posted by: Josh at June 1, 2006 11:33 AM


If we hadn't invaded Iraq we would still be speaking American English today

Just as we were speaking American English when Hitler invaded the Rhineland and when Japan invaded China.

What if Lindbergh's America First party had prevailed and kept us out of WWII ... what would Europe and Asia look like? What if McClellan and the Democrat copperheads had been successful about negotiating with the Confederacy...how would the US look?

YOU might not have children and grand children to worry about, but I do.

Posted by: Darleen at June 1, 2006 12:36 PM

Indeed. Iraq circa 2003 is relevantly similar to Germany circa 1939. Hussein, like Hitler, commanded a large, well-equipped and well-trained army and ruled a populace mobilized for war and adhering to a nationalistic race-based ideology. And as we all know, Hussein was party to a tripartite pact with Al Quaeda and, I don't know, Iran maybe? Truly an apt analogy.

Posted by: Josh at June 1, 2006 02:12 PM

- Hesbullah/Hamas/Syria Josh.... Never Iran.... Shi'a and Sunni.....mortal enemies, even above the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" meme. But the point still stands. The appeasement you see coming from the left is exactly the same group think of Chamberlains time, and would/will always illicit the exact same results, because appeasement just animates your typical despotic leader even more. thats a lesson that some just can't get through their thick skulls. You just insure your enslavement that much quicker when you appease, or capitulate, and worse then many more millions end up dead.

- Its estimated that if just one strong group would have fought back, Hitlers National Socialist party, (makes a lot of the lefts idiotic Socialistic positions ring kind of hollow doesn't it), wouldn't have been able to pull it off. His failure would have put pressure on Stalin to some extent to tone it down a little, so who knows, maybe as many as 20 to 40 million people would have been spared between the four Axis powers, if they'd never been a WWII. Yeh. I got your appeasement blu/Brad/moonbats et AL.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 1, 2006 03:24 PM

Not invading = appeasement?

Posted by: Josh at June 1, 2006 03:36 PM

Well under certain circumstances - yes. When a country, or in this case a dispotic warped religious sect, the Wahhabists, declare war on the West, and carry out a series of attacks, or in Husseins case, use WMD's and threaten to use more if he can get/develop them, mass murder his own people, offer aid to al Qaeda, our principle antagonist, then it becomes a cat and mouse game that only ends if you take the initiative.

Otherwise they would have gone on expanding, gathering strength and arms, and taking pot shots at us every chance they got, until it was an entire American city going up in atomic dust. It still might come to that if the terrorist orgs ever get their hands on WMD's. Now Iran jumps into the fray, because the radical Islamic powers see their crusade getting ripped apart, and they're panicky. We'll have to deal with that eventually too, and better sooner than later.

If Bush 41 hadn't been such a pansy, the whole situation might have been different. If Dessert Storm would have finished the damn job, who knows how many things might have been different, even 9/11 might have never happened. Usama hated Hussein. His arguments with the Saudi Royal Princes over attacking Hussein was one of the things that got him booted out.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 1, 2006 03:50 PM

Do you think Hussein was a bigger threat than the Soviet Union?

Posted by: Josh at June 1, 2006 04:24 PM

Husseins "threat level" came from his crazy tendencies to act impulsively, and without regard to anything; Iran war/Kuwait occupation/gassing, trying to develop nucler/chemical/biotics.

He wanted to become the lynch-pin power in the WOT, by expanding his weapons, helping al Qaeda/Hamas, and so forth. He was not a super power like the Soviets had been, but he could have become a maniac with the bomb if left unopposed.

- Even in the case of Kruschev, we never had that problem with Russia (assured mutual destruction). Neither we, nor the Soviets, could risk a war. Cuba was Russia's panicky answer to our putting medium range missiles in Turkey, and Kennedy's bungle was only resolved by reversing the process. It never had to happen.

- After the deployment of the nuclear sub fleets in '73, (which was the reason we were still in Nam and got out immediately when that had been accomplished), it became a war of economic attrition. So that question, the comparisons, is not really apropos.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 1, 2006 04:39 PM

He was not a super power like the Soviets had been, but he could have become a maniac with the bomb if left unopposed.

Seems to me that a war needs a bit more than "could have" as justification.

Posted by: Josh at June 1, 2006 05:23 PM

- Well, you're welcome to your opinion. If it was your city that you had to make a roll of the dice on, I doubt you'd be so "open minded".

- Hopefully you'll never be faced with that decision, since others took the initiative, instead of waiting for it to happen.

- All the "I'm sorry, I didn't know's", sorrow, and wishing after the fact, tends not to do much good for the dead.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 1, 2006 05:30 PM

- The real tradgedy is it could still happen, even with our best efforts. But to not even try is the height of folly. Maybe we've caught it in time. Maybe we can use enough combination of Diplomacy and coalition pressure on Iran to back down.

- A lot of maybe's, even when we face the enemy. What would happen if we didn't has been repeated through history so many times it would be amazing anyone who values freedom, liberty and Democratic life would think for a second anything differently. But I'm not amazed at all. I've seen the pernicious effects of insidious espionage before.

- The Left is being used and they won't even look at it, because their puppet masters are clever, so they weave the trance to align with the Lefts main goals. Of course should the Despot win, the left, the "elite", get the first taste of the "New order". Old news.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 1, 2006 05:40 PM

A German philosopher...Friedrich Nietzsche said:
"In individuals insanity is rare, but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule"

George W. Bush "We will export death and destruction to the four corners of the earth in defense of our great nation."

T.D. Allman: "The United States is the greatest threat to world peace, and has been for a long time, and not only because it si the world's only superpower. Equally important, the United States is also far more disposed to use its power than any other powerful nation currently is. Though Americans are culturall and emotionally blind to the fact, the mere intrusion of U.S. power is, in and of itself destabilizing."

William Blum: "From 1945 to 2003, the United States has attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist national movements fighting against the intolerable regimes. In the process the US has bombed some 25 countries, caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of aganoy and despair"

International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg: "To initiate a war of aggression...is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes, in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

Posted by: blubonnet at June 2, 2006 12:40 AM


You're really spacing out there. First off, do cite the GW quote... I didn't find it.

And don't you find "From 1945 to 2003, the United States has attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments" kinda revealing that Blum is not too sure of American involvment in WWII?

I bet Blum and Allman are the kinda of wankers would hate cops until they get mugged.

Posted by: Darleen at June 2, 2006 05:54 AM

Actually, I live and work in Manhattan. So, from an ex ante perspective, what would you say the chances were that allowing the Hussein regime to continue would result in some kind of calamity in a US city? How about ex post, knowing what we know now?

Posted by: Josh at June 2, 2006 06:38 AM

- The Left is not going to let up on this for one simple reason. History has shown that in a war setting, especially if its successfully concluded, but even if its ongoing, the incumbent party tends to stay in power. There’s two principle reasons for this. The first is people are simply afraid to change horses in midstream because it might mess things up in some way they can’t be sure of, and second because any sort of success by the existing administration, puts it in the “why change” category among voters.

- The Liberals know this, so the game plan is to attack the entire WOT operation from top to bottom. So it has nothing to do with Patriotism in their minds. They see it as strickly politics. They justify that by denying a war even exists for starters, and then go from there. No war, no Insurgents, No enemy, then you can subvert at will, and avoid the dichotomy of aide and support to the enemy. They desperately want, and think they need, the WOT off the table by the time 2008 rolls around.

- I’m sure they’re really frustrated with the Iranian situation, because that sets the stage to keep the whole WOT thing going visably in the press, which is the last thing they want. Watch for the Left to do everything they can to “minimize” Iran as a threat, and blame and continue to demonize Isreal for being the protagonist in all problems concerning the middle east.

- So far the whole thing has back-fired on them badly, gaining them the widespread rep of being soft on terror, and not to be trusted in a war setting. Murtha, and all the others are trying to turn this into another Vietnam, because it worked once, and they think it will work again. You’re not likely to see two weeks in a row go by without “something”, even if they have to make things up, or spread wild rumors ahead of the facts, the principle being the truth doesn’t matter, just the perceptions.

- So we have the unfortunate situation of having a fairly smallish, but vociferous minority, that will attempt to push the US efforts and diplomacy through the press and the so-called anti-war effort, when really it’s a political scheme to regain power.

- One grace saving item that works against the hard left, is this intercinal war thats starting within the Democratic party between the Deaniac’s and the Clintonista’s. Hopefully that will limit their effectiveness, which could put all Americans in even greater danger, with the Jihadists taking advantage of every aspect of the PR war, since their “movement” has been shredded in every other regard.

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 2, 2006 08:51 AM

- Heres something I thought all of you might like to read that hammers home the “future” America we might all have to live with if certain “agents” have thier way politically as we move forward. A bit lengthy but it was in an Email and theres no other way to link it. I think its the sort of “Truth to propaganda” we so badly need in the next few years. See what you think.

How to Destroy the American Dream
5/29/2006 5:31:00 PM - Sacred Heart List

We know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context, his thoughts are particularly poignant. Last week there was an immigration over-population conference in Washington DC, filled to capacity by many of American’s finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, “Mexifornia,” explaining how immigration - both legal and illegal - was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.

- Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, “If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that ‘An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.’”

- “Here is how they do it,” Lamm said:

- “First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: ‘The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate, are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.’ Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.”

- Lamm went on: “Second, to destroy America, invent ‘multiculturalism’ and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

- Third, “We could make the United States a ‘Hispanic Quebec’ without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: ‘The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multi-cultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.’ Lamm said, “I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities.”

- “Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school.”

- “My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of ‘Victimology.’ I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.”

- “My sixth plan for America’s downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other. That is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. E Pluribus Unum” — from many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the ‘Pluribus’, instead of the ‘Unum,’ we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.”

- “Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits; make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of ‘diversity.’ I would find a word similar to ‘heretic’ in the 16th century that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like ‘racist’ or ‘xenophobe’ halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of ‘Victimology,’ I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them.”

- In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said,. “Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis’s book ‘Mexifornia.’ His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don’t read that book.”
There was no applause. A chilling fear quietly rose like an ominous cloud above every attendee at the conference. Every American in that room knew that everything Lamm enumerated was proceeding methodically, quietly, darkly yet pervasively across the United States today. Discussion is being suppressed. Over 100 languages are ripping the foundation of our educational system and national cohesiveness. Barbaric cultures, such as those that practice female genital mutilation, are growing as we celebrate ‘diversity.’ American jobs are vanishing into the Third World as corporations create a Third World in America. Take note of California and other states. To date, ten million illegal aliens and growing fast. It is reminiscent of George Orwell’s book 1984.” In that story, three slogans are engraved in the Ministry of Truth building: ‘War is peace,’ ‘Freedom is slavery,’ and ‘Ignorance is strength.’”

- Governor Lamm walked back to his seat. It dawned on everyone at the conference that our nation and the future of this great democracy is deeply in trouble and worsening fast, if we don’t get this immigration monster stopped. Within three years, it will rage like a California wildfire and destroy everything in its path, especially The American Dream.

(Some of the things he describes sound familiar?)

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 2, 2006 11:44 AM

Some of the things he describes sound familiar?)

Yeah, BBH: he sounds like Hitler and Goebbels.

Posted by: Brad at June 2, 2006 08:21 PM

Oh.... you mean THAT National Socialist party.... well you must be an expert in that then Brad boy....

- you just can't get kicked in the ass enough.... keep coming back for more... must be all that "elitist" brain power of yours....

Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at June 3, 2006 12:26 AM