Obama as Captain Queeg

What, exactly have things come to when a cockroach of a country, apparently run by real, certifiable lunatics, can threaten the United States with nuclear weapons? The typhoon waves are starting to break over the bridge.

Is Barack Obama really Captain Queeg?

In Herman Wouk’s classic World War II novel, The Caine Mutiny, there is a moment when a group of the ship’s officers are getting away from the increasingly eccentric Captain Queeq by relaxing ashore.

Suddenly the malcontent Lieutenant Keefer asks the others: “Does it occur to you that Captain Queeg may be insane?

In fact Queeg is not insane, at least not at that time. He is simply grappling, more and more disastrously, with a job too big for him. Come the crisis of a typhoon, he becomes paralyzed and nearly sinks the ship by failing to give the obvious orders. ...

Obama’s second inauguration speech may be his Queeg moment — an undeniable demonstration that, in an emergency, he is incapable of grappling with reality. For all his unceasing invocation of the word “change,” the outstanding thing about Obama has been his apparent inability to react, even to an imminent crisis. Like Queeg, he stands frozen on the bridge as the waves grow higher, or obsesses over issues like homosexuals and women in the military as the typhoon rises.

Faced with the worst looming fiscal cliff-fall in world history Obama, like Queeg in the typhoon, has done nothing at all, but has, increasingly, resorted to meaningless words. His pseudo-Keynesian fiscal notions and a mantra-like repetition of old and failed ideas, suggest a serious lack on mental versatility.

If more examples are needed, reflect on Obama's predictions of doom and destruction if he does not get his way on sequestration.

The problme that America has with a Chief Executive who may not be sane is that instead of freezing up he may act totally irrationally. We may have to begin asking, at least in private, what the country can do to protect iself against a President who is so far out o fhis depth that he goes insane.

AA Passenger Causes Disturbance After Leaving DFW Airport

Flight 2401 left Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport bound for Los Angeles. Passenger Lori Barber said about 15 minutes into the flight a man charged past her, demanding to see the pilot.

Barber told NewsRadio 1080 KRLD the man was hard to miss.

“Well he was wearing two pairs of glasses, one with a red beam coming out of the lens, and he had three or four ‘man purses’ on and he had Superman socks on,” she recalled

Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover. Some people you can just look at and know their position on the environment, politics, global warming, corporations, capitalism, communism, Christianity, racism, sexism, feminism, Limbaugh, Obama, Palin, Maher and much more without even hearing them talk.

Bumper Sticker “9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB”?

Mark Steyn shows that if you are sufficiently deranged you can hold two contradictory ideas in your head simultaneously, believing both.

Of the conspiracy nuts, they hold that Bush and his minions are both stupid and diabolically clever:

And that would be the relatively sane reaction. Have you seen that bumper sticker “9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB”? If you haven’t, go to a college town and cruise Main Street for a couple of minutes. It seems odd that a fascist regime which thinks nothing of killing thousands of people in a big landmark building in the center of the city hasn’t quietly offed some of these dissident professors — or at least the guy with the sticker-printing contract. Fearlessly, Robert Fisk of Britain’s Independent, the alleged dean of Middle East correspondents, has now crossed over to the truther side and written a piece headlined, “Even I Question The ‘Truth’ About 9/11.” According to a poll in May, 35 percent of Democrats believe that Bush knew about 9/11 in advance. Did Rumsfeld also know? Almost certainly. That’s why he went to his office as normal that today, because he knew in advance that the plane would slice through the Pentagon but come to a halt on the far side of the photocopier. That’s how well-planned it was, unlike Iraq.

And it appears that the longer the nutroots pump this stuff into the body politic, the more converts they're making.

Apparently, 39 percent of Democrats still believe Bush didn’t know in advance — or, at any rate, so they said in May. But I’m confident half of them will have joined Rosie O’Donnell on the melted steely knoll before the Iowa caucuses. If Iraq is another Vietnam, 9/11 is another Kennedy assassination. Were Bali, Madrid, and London also inside jobs by the Bush Gang? If so, it’s no wonder federal spending’s out of control.

And if your grief can be assuaged by cash, why just sue virtually anyone who was anywhere near the scene. Anyone, that is, except the perps.

And what of those for whom the events of six years ago were more than just conspiracy fodder? Last week the New York Times carried a story about the current state of the 9/11 lawsuits. Relatives of 42 of the dead are suing various parties for compensation, on the grounds that what happened that Tuesday morning should have been anticipated. The law firm Motley Rice, diversifying from its traditional lucrative class-action hunting grounds of tobacco, asbestos and lead paint, is promising to put on the witness stand everybody who “allowed the events of 9/11 to happen”. And they mean everybody — American Airlines, United, Boeing, the airport authorities, the security firms — everybody, that is, except the guys who did it.

According to the Times, many of the bereaved are angry and determined that their loved one’s death should have meaning. Yet the meaning they’re after surely strikes our enemies not just as extremely odd but as one more reason why they’ll win. You launch an act of war, and the victims respond with a lawsuit against their own countrymen. But that’s the American way: Almost every news story boils down to somebody standing in front of a microphone and announcing that he’s retained counsel. Last week, it was Larry Craig. Next week, it’ll be the survivors of Ahmadinejad’s nuclear test in Westchester County. As Andrew McCarthy pointed out, a legalistic culture invariably misses the forest for the trees. Senator Craig should know that what matters is not whether an artful lawyer can get him off on a technicality but whether the public thinks he trawls for anonymous sex in public bathrooms. Likewise, those 9/11 families should know that, if you want your child’s death that morning to have meaning, what matters is not whether you hound Boeing into admitting liability but whether you insist that the movement that murdered your daughter is hunted down and the sustaining ideological virus that led thousands of others to dance up and down in the streets cheering her death is expunged from the earth.

For the shrinking part of the American public who is not yet looney, you have to stand in awe of the kind of mind that can engage in these kind of fantasies. Yet we should not be surprised. History is littered with people who led movements that were in restrospect not just insane but deadly. Just in the last century, we have had leaders and cultures that killed millions because they were of the "wrong" social class, or religion, or wore glasses. Why should America be immune to such mass hysteria?

Kate Smith is dead and "God Bless America" is rarely sung. Perhaps it's unconstitutional? We'll have to ask the courts to rule on that one. So perhaps the God that used to bless America has turned his face away, as he turned his face from Israel from time to time. On this Sunday, I pray not.

Dr. Sanity's Analysis of the Muslim Male

Honor killings of women are all too common in Arab culture, and, even more importantly are not dissuaded by Islam. Here is a graphic video of an honor killing (don't watch it unless you are prepared to be sick) .

Or, See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here-- I could go on and on...about FGM (discussed here and here); or about the brutality of the Taliban and the desperate attempts that enjoy the sanction of Islam to subjugate women, dehumanize them, and cover up any hint of their evil sexuality so that it doesn't "defile" others.

If there was ever in history a better example of the paranoid fear of female sexuality, I can't think of it. You don't have to be much of an expert on Islam or Muslim culture to be able to observe that it has evolved into a societal structure whose primary purpose is to contain and manage female sexuality.This containment has not only become a key aspect of the worship of their god; but it also is a key factor in individual personality development; as well as the main pollutant of all possible social interactions within the culture.

The men of Islam are obsessed with sex beyond even the wildest imaginings of the Western male's mind. And the obsession is far from healthy and even further from reality.

We frequently joke about men's preoccupation with sex and female body parts in the West, but our fascination with "T&A" is nothing when you consider that the Muslim world is literally consumed by female sexuality and with their fear of it. It is ironic that both Muslim men and women are under the mistaken impression that Western society is oversexualized compared to them, when in fact, it is practically impossible to be more obsessed with sexual matters than they are in Muslim communities.

Consider for a moment a culture that would prefer to let young girls die in a burning building than to risk having them run out of said building not clothed in properly modest dress; and tell me that such a society is less preoccupied with matters of sex than we are in the West.

Enormous effort goes into veiling women, dressing women modestly, silencing women, covering women's bodies, punishing women, controlling women, reviling women, humiliating women, beating women, subjugating women, avoiding the dishonor of women, keeping women uneducated, policing women, infantilizing women--in short, dehumanizing women in every way possible -- all under the guise of "protecting" and "honoring" them as they relegate them to animal-like status.

The women in this misogynistic Islam are brainwashed from birth into thinking that this cultural preoccupation somehow is necessary and that it "liberates" them in some bizarre manner.

Amazingly, this medieval culture has grasped the fundamentals of both Orwellian and postmodern rhetorical rationalizations, that are so prominent in certain intellectual quarters within our own culture! I have heard the canned rationalizations coming from their lips of muslim women myself; and they all claim that it frees them from having to be "sexual objects."

On the contrary, in Islamic society that is apparently the only role open to women. That, and breeders for the jihad.

This societal psychopathology poisons all interactions between the genders; takes up an incredible amount of time and effort in so-called "intellectual" circles and is the subject of religious edicts and innumerable rules and strictures on women's behavior and in the religious and social life; and causes the pseudoscientific rantings of arrogantly pathetic men (like the one above) who try to justify their misogyny so that they don't have to deal with the reality of their frightened and impotent masculinity.Women become mere possessions-vessels/repositories of the impotent and inadequate male's honor. That men and women could relate equally in every sphere of human endeavor is a concept that is so alien and so threatening; I suspect it is what partly drives the rage the males feel toward western culture in general.

Without the subjugated woman, the entire house of cards of Islam and Arab culture will come tumbling down. And with at least 50% of their population de-humanized, is it at all surprising that Islamic culture wherever it has taken root inevitably evolves into backward, primitive, violent, and non-productive societies?

I have said it before and I will say it again here: the treatment of women under Islam is not only the key to understanding the pathology of the culture, but also the key to developing an antidote to its most poisonous and toxic elements.

Unveiling the women of Islam and eliminating their second-class status; empowering them in the oppressive Islamic countries where their individuality and self-expression has been crushed-- may cause a ripple effect that could eventually alter a family structure that currently encourages the development of generation after generation of dysfunctional and pathological men and women.

What seems most characteristic about the type of Islam practiced in the Middle East today (and being exported around the world) is that its attitude toward women most certainly has no relationship to reality. Reality is indeed a "mistake" in their eyes, and they fully intend to rectify it--no matter how many deaths and lives are sacrificed to their perverted religious ideology.

Psychiatrists generally refers to this state as "psychotic" and "delusional".It has been argued (and there is a great deal of merit in the argument, in my opinion) that Islamist terror can be thought of in part, at least, as a response to sexual rage, frustration, and the humiliation of being connected to a "degraded mother." Thus the men in the culture must constantly assert their masculinity, defend their masculine "honor", and strike out in rage against any who "shame" them. This is apparent in the sexual mutilation of terror victims who are perceived as "inferior" by the Islamists, and on a par with women of their own culture. It is also seen in the Freudian symbolism of the barbaric act of beheading; as well as in the ubiquitous rape of non-muslim women around the world.

Read the whole thing.

Mental Institution, Michael.

Fred Thompson responds to Michael Moore.

Retreat in Iraq, Make War on Pakistan!

Newt Gingrich makes the case that the debate on what we should do about the war in Iraq should involve a serious discussion about the consequences of an American defeat.

Click on the link to for the YouTube video.

What is even more interesting than the case that Newt makes is the content of a Liberal who goes by the name of "pbilger." Pbilger seems to make a snide comment about each of Newt's video clips, but this one is so incredibly stupid that it deserves recording for all time:

You just don't get it Newt. "It is believed that al-Qaeda has in fact regrouped in Pakistan-Afghanistan border region and now poses a more direct threat, particularly to the United States as well as the UK". By Gordon Corere BBC Senior Security counter-terrorist Official 10-23-06. I think the Dem's have it right. Bring home the troops from Iraq and re-group in Afghanistan march into Pakistan and take out Al-Qaeda. That's what we should of done in the first place.

The ability to - on the one hand - decide that we can't win in Iraq with a population of 20 million whose most sophisticated weapons are IEDs and suicide bombers, and - on the other hand - seriously propose that we attack a country with a population of about 170 million people armed with nuclear weapons is so insane that we know that "pbilger" is in the mainstream of Liberal thought.