College Football Needs More Criminals

A fellow named Pinkett committed a gaffe, which is defined as someone accidentally telling the truth.  He said Notre Dame needed a few criminals on its football team in order to start winning.  People find the comment deplorable, and then note that it is accurate.

Police departments keep a few criminals around to give themselves an edge. When Officer Nicely cannot get the job done, he simply calls for "backup" and Officer Felon comes in and does the crime.

Here is a second offense officer, he had been convicted before, kicking a handcuffed woman in the head.  The people reviewing his case are three police officers.  The second-conviction officer is resisting sanctions.  Why the other two officers who stood by while a crime was committed are not in jail either is a mystery.  But hey, the are friendly officers.

The reason such officers are never punished is that those reviewing the cases want such criminals on the force.  Tolstoy talked about nice officials being cover for criminal officials.  The prosecutors, judges and everyone else naturally prefer their armed guards to some handcuffed nurse body slammed to the ground, twice.

If you feel a woman needs to be kicked in the head, do it yourself.  Don't have a society that is structured so you just pay someone else to kick a woman in the head.  That officer was using his foot on your behalf.  You paid for it.  And you vote for the people who continue this.  It's your foot.

If you do it yourself, then it is not a guaranteed death sentence if someone like me defends the woman who is being kicked in the head by armed thugs.  If I had intervened, the two other officers would have killed me.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Tolstoy On Liberals

Circa 1896 Lev Nikolaevich wrote a letter to liberals who were encouraging him to join their group to effect change.  His reply sounds like it could be written today.  What has changed?

That is one evil resulting from the activity of Liberals who participate in the affairs of government, or who come to terms with it. Another evil of such activity is that, in order to secure opportunities to carry on their work, these highly enlightened and honest people have to begin to compromise, and so, little by little, come to consider that, for a good end, one may swerve somewhat from truth in word and deed. For instance, that one may, though not believing in the established Church, go through its ceremonies; may take oaths; and may, when necessary for the success of some affair, present petitions couched in language which is untrue and offensive to man's natural dignity: may enter the army; may take part in a local government which has been stripped of all its powers; may serve as a master or a professor, teaching not what one considers necessary oneself, but what one is told to preach by government; and that one may even become a Zemsky Nachalnik, submitting to governmental demands and instructions which violate one's conscience; may edit newspapers and periodicals, remaining silent about what ought to be mentioned, and printing what one is ordered to print; and entering into these compromises – the limits of which cannot be foreseen – enlightened and honest people (who alone could form some barrier to the infringements of human liberty by the government, imperceptibly retreating ever farther and farther from the demands of conscience) fall at last into a position of complete dependency on government. They receive rewards and salaries from it, and, continuing to imagine they are forwarding liberal ideas, they become the humble servants and supporters of the very order against which they set out to fight.

Merely the simple, quiet, truthful carrying on of what you consider good and needful, quite independently of government, and of whether it likes it or not. In other words: standing up for your rights, not as a member of the Literature Committee, not as a deputy, not as a landowner, not as a merchant, not even as a member of Parliament; but standing up for your rights as a rational and free man, and defending them, not as the rights of local boards or committees are defended, with concessions and compromises, but without any concessions and compromises, in the only way in which moral and human dignity can be defended.

Greenfield on War-o-tainment

Greenfields article also includes a great section on what happens if anyone in the media questions the coverage of war...  they disappear.

Conscientious Objection to All War

There are wars in the sense we first think, and then there are the wars on drugs, poverty, domestic violence, etc.  I am a conscientious objector in those wars too.  The war on poverty is really a war on poor people, and the war on drugs is a war on people who self-medicate, and the war on domestic violence is a war on the family and so on

Any time the State starts a war, bad things happen.  We need to be an objector to all wars.