Dispatch from the Religion of Peace

We haven't done a dispatch from the RoP for a while, but only because it's now so routine as to be unremarkable. Sometimes, however, the always peaceful and holy Islamists reach a new pinnacle of tolerance. From Mark Stein:

So a Jew, a homosexual, and an uncovered woman walk into a Waziristani bar, and the barman says, “Sorry, everyone’s out killing polio workers“

That's right, the peaceful followers of the RoP have now expanded their murderous venom from Jews, gays, and women to now include health care workers.

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.

Thomas Jefferson

Only in America

THE TOP-10 'Only In America' Observations - by a Canadian: After the last election, it is truly hard to understand why the American People voted the way they did, considering the following 10 points?

1) Only in America, could a certain politician talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

2) Only in America, could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and an 18% black federal workforce, but a black population of only 12%.

3) Only in America, could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury Department, and Charles Rangel, who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

4) Only in America, could they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

5) Only in America, could they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while they discuss letting people who sneak into the country illegally just 'magically' become American citizens.

6) Only in America, could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists."

7) Only in America, could they need to present a driver's license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

8) Only in America, could they demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up, when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of the return of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

9) Only in America, could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn't have nearly enough money.

10) Only in America, could the rich people - who pay 86% of all federal income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any federal income taxes at all.

Tall Bike

Today I completed my first "Tall Bike" since circa 1974. Total investment: $50. We used to build them for nothing back in the day, but we had to steal rebar from construction sites and connecting hardware from Dad.

The Slippery Slope

Many on the left make fun of the "slippery slope" argument. Sometimes, though, it's an appropriate and rational discussion to have.

Here's my slippery slope question: "Before redefining marriage from a relationship between a man and a woman to a relationship between consenting adults, can we agree about which consenting adult relationships will not qualify as "marriages?" We haven't had that debate yet, which is why I oppose gay marriage. It shouldn't be permitted until we explore what other doors might be accidentally thrown open. Adults consent to a lot of things, and once we've made that the standard, how do we keep it at two? Why can't three adults consent? What next? How can we re-write marriage law to accommodate gays without opening up a pandora's box of possible marriages? It's a debate worth having.

Here's a perfect example of why the slippery slope argument needs to be respected. Consider what some now consider acceptable:

A disturbing column in the Guardian more than suggests that pedophilia may just be another “sexual orientation,” an odious comparison. The argument being made is that by acknowledging that the desire for sex with children as just part of the human condition, we can somehow better protect children. Yet, the article also points to some academics who say that sex with adults doesn’t hurt children. Can we say, “normalization”?

That is perfectly reprehensible, but given the way are constantly lectured that "tolerance" of all sorts of sexual behavior is the only civilized reaction, it is also perfectly predictable. It's the very bottom of a slippery slope.