Megafeature: A Summary of the Stings

Source Photobucket

One of the more remarkable innovations of the T.E.A. party has been the use of "sting" operations. These sting operations involve a hapless victim that the teamen in question feel is being disingenuous, and a disguise of a figure that they feel he or she will be honest to. Sometimes the plot itself is so absurd that its practicality serves as a lesson regardless of the result, and then even more absurdly, it is vindicated. Such an example was the sting operation against a ground manager of a Planned Parenthood clinic, who has since been fired:

Planned Parenthood Sting Video

The most disturbing part of this video comes at timemark 8:38, when the manager informs a pimp how to avoid being detected by the law, how to avoid arrest, so that he and his enslaved Columbian girls, scared and far from home, can continue violating the states prostitution law and abort the babies thus produced. The most troubling aspect, however, is the callous and unthinking way she talks to one of the most evil kinds of villains that can exist: a slaver, and not just a slaver, but one who violates females through forced prostitution.

Then there's the issue of government waste. For this we get the NPR sting, a sting against an organization that is supposedly a national radio station of the United States but has long been suspected of bias in favor of progressives. The NPR sting demonstrated (sort of, well get to that in a minute) numerous bigoted statements, from comparing conservative Christians to the Taliban, to hating upon gun owners and the federal standards enforced upon NPR that they do a more then good enough job bending already:

This sting is not without controversy, in fact it may be without support. Sources from all across the political spectrum, as far left as the Huffington Post and as far right as the Blaze (Glenn Becks newspaper/amalgamator) have criticized O'Keefes video for its extremely unethical and dishonest editing techniques. Many, in fact, the left-wing Brudowsky praised Glenn Beck for his extremely professional, objective, and powerful dissection of the "NPR Sting," and I am among many whose respect for Mr. Beck, an icon of the Tea Party and the right in general, has greatly increased. While Becks criticism is in general the most thorough and useful to read through, there is one particular quote from the Huffington Post criticism that I find especially potent:

While Schiller does say the Republican Party has been "hijacked" by the tea party and Christian evangelicals -- and is "fanatically involved in people's personal lives" -- it is evident in the full tape that he is not giving his own view but rather quoting two influential Republicans, according to reporter Folkenflik. Schiller does not challenge those assertions, but they are not his.

O'Keefe is also famous for his ACORN stings, including one where, with his girlfriend, he attempted (and nearly did, with extensive assistance offered) to acquire starting funds for a prostitution house that he would pay back on interest that ACORN could use for political campaigns. Before this, he attempted to have Lucky Charms removed from the Rutgers cafeteria because it is "offensive to his Irish heritage" and apparently caught a conversation with the dining chiefs on tape exposing the absurdity of the situation. He stated that he is "still in [his] bunker producing more videos. We're releasing another video in San Diego right now. I'm focusing on doing what I do best." Although congress looked to punish ACORN with a defunding bill, a Federal Court has ruled that such actions would be the exclusive remedy of the Judicial Branch. This is not the first time recently that we have seen our governments dormant constitutional protections awoken from their sleep, and everyone is watching as the American people push for reform and government officials pit "ambition against ambition" in a classic display of democratic, Madisonian magic.

The organization Life Dynamics dialed up 800 calls to Planned Parenthood stating that they needed an abortion for a 13-year-old to cover up impregnation by her 22-year-old boyfriend. This is illegal in all 50 states, but Planned Parenthood did not report any of these incidences. Just for the record, I actually support the actions of Planned Parenthood in this regard, as concealing a pregnancy is, at least in my mind, a good (if not the only good) reason for abortion as it is a case where putting up the baby for adoption is simply not good enough. This said, I know that many disagree with this sentiment, and technically it is against the (stupid) law, which requires all suspected cases of abuse to be reported to authorities by medical professionals.

And then finally, and greatest of all, is ClimateGate, the sting operation that may have fundamentally altered global environmental politics, and that the Democrat Party at large insists on ignoring the ramifications of. The product of a hacker, 1000 emails among staff at the UK's Climate Research Unit have been made public. Although FactCheck.org, in its examination of ClimateGate, disagrees that it disproves anthropogenic global warming, a conclusion a self-interested Saudi came to, it does agree that the emails show scientists "sometimes being rude, dismissive, insular, or even behaving like jerks" while the public has rightly responded to attitudes and interpersonal aggression, such as declaring global warming "settled science" along with the climategate emails, clearly not conducive to good science. While the ClimateGate emails may or may not (I have not read them myself) show the science to be false, they do show the scientists to be false, and with the alternative sources offered all being government entities (NOAA and NASA), we the public are left with little more then a few university degrees on which to trust theories that could fundamentally alter our lives.

Unfortunately, and we see this clearly with ClimateGate, named for the much lesser WaterGate, "operations" like these can only have a true impact (where the much better funded and marketed "Supersize Me!" failed) when a cultural context exists to support them.

To create such, we have a play with many characters. There's an arugula growing, elite talking, Harvard Law-Chicago Cesspool Obama intent on breaking the budget with spending in excess of even Bush. There's an irrepressible lady from California and gentleman from Nevada who seem intent on shattering any popular or political movement against them. There's a lightbulb ban, an "individual mandate" (thou must purchase something, approved by thine bureaucratic overlords, if thou seekest to breathe) and big shot corporations receiving welfare while "99ers" go cold and hungry in the street. There's government destroying cars to make people buy more and a liberal establishment that wants congress to pass a bill so they can read what's in them. There's an American people who do not even understand all the "Hope" and "Change" that their initially lauded leader has brought.

In short, political overreach, and too much game playing, manipulation and intrigue for an American people who know they will be the ones to pay the bill.

Responding to the controversy, Slate commisioned blogger Weigel held a twitter conversation with one of the publishers of the original, edited, NPR Sting video. The exchange is revealing. The actual conversation reveals an NPR chief quoting a top donor for the Republican Party as saying he voted for Obama because he's scared of the xenophobic, gun-toting, racist post-Obama Party. When Weigel challenges him on this account, the publisher responds: "No, it's really not. Go ahead and try to make the argument Schiller isn't CLEARLY agreeing with them. Go ahead. Moron."

To the publishers credit, the actual tone expressed in the original quote does indicate, at the very least, a fear that the Kingmaker may be right. And a Kingmaker is generally held in high esteem. Also to the publishers credit, while this "edit" is not good journalism, username "simon templar" is not a professional journalist, and clearly feels very overwhelmed as this tweet reveals: "nobody likes an access journalist/tweeter. we'll get you the info/emails you asked for eventually, I'm sure." It is also worth noting that every controversial remark attributed, falsely or otherwise, to the NPR head in the sting, is commonly found among liberals on the internet and in IRL, including, of course, the "gun-toting nutjobs" line that is argued over in this article.

"simon templar" is a common man, pushed in to uncommon work. He is, in fact, out of his league, but right now, who IS in their league?

Which leads me to my next point, what's become irrelevant. While teamen with camcorders flood the internet with "stings," documentaries by top Hollywood directors like Oliver Stone (e.g. "W") go totally unwatched and unremembered. I can't even remember the last time a story about a Hollywood star, a bigshot CEO, or a Harvard professor made the papers. The only "elites" who still seem to make papers, in fact, are the politicians we're all scared of and a few big media demagogues, like Krugman and O'Reilly, who are little more then highly paid whipping boys for the common citizens. In the words of Scripture: "the last shall be first, and the first shall be last."

And then there's the Middle East. While here at home we break our own elite peacefully, using the full well-oiled machinery of our democracy and a thousand years of Western legal wisdom, the streets of Benghazi are soaked in blood. The alleys of Bahrain lay covered in shell casings, and aircraft streak over the Mediterranean carrying every sort of explosive payload. In Egypt, the army, a traditional symbol of tyranny and distrust, is helping to provide for what the Arab world doesn't have, insisting on all parties respecting each other and disarming those who would hurt the people. That Army has so much to be proud of, and I know I would be proud to carry an Egyptian rifle right now. In this great moment to be alive, the long oppressed show the irrepressible, stubborn, freedom-loving and faithful spirit of humanity. They also almost exactly mirror the tea party, using many of the same methods, and the sheer tinyness of the media involved makes it nearly impossible for the government to stop the word. The government is stopping army ants with an elephant gun.

And then there's Japan, where ordinary men and women, Japanese and others, have volunteered their time by the truckload to rebuild and service the survivors*, and where the nations eyes lay flatly and squarely pointed towards the power plant workers risking their lives to bring a reactor under control. "She said in an entry on social networking site Mixi that her boyfriend, who also works at the plant, had tearfully told her "you go ahead to safety", before she evacuated in a company car." (Hindustan Times)

And in Britain, flash mobs have become a common occurence.

We find a world suspiciously popular and self-driven, where the elites find themselves unneeded and out of touch. This is the world where Obama is trying to force huge, coercive government actions and sweeping reforms led by, you guessed it, the elites. This is the world that Obama, half Harvard and half machine politician, an outdated relic from a time period that mostly ended in 1910, finds himself in. The past meets the future, my friends, and usually, the future wins.

*Source note: You will need to browse to the end of the article to find this information. Here's a quote:

Fumio and her daughter were among the roughly 600 people (men, women and children of all ages) who had taken shelter on the gymnasium's wood floor, beneath the basketball hoops and nets. Evacuees were offered food, such as warm milk and rice — some of which had been taken from a home economics class — and a place to sleep. A flat-panel television was broadcasting news of the unfolding catastrophe, which by then was focused on the potential meltdown of reactors within the Fukushima nuclear plants.

Collectivism Doesn't Exist - The Thomas Friedman Story

300 degree panorama from the summit of Diedamskopf Schoppernau, Bohringer Frederich, c.c.a.s.a 2.0

I have to hand it to Thomas Friedman. Although much of the time his editorials are total partisan fluff, I believe there is a particular contribution he has made to the wealth of human knowledge that could well survive a thousand years: his splendid analysis of the human group and nation. In his magnum opus, "The World is Flat," which it has been many years since I read, he takes the world economy from both the angle of the nation, the producer, and the self-interested customer. Now, just recently, he has returned to what he is truly good at, with his recent editorial about Egypt.

In this editorial, he outlines Google Earth, a black president with Islamic last name, the rapid spread of information by way of the web, the ostentatious televised Beijing Olympics and a Palestinian populist as major influences on Middle East revolts. The bigger message is the notion of individual human beings connected to a plethora of information that teaches them, and causes them to change their decisions.

See, Friedman doesn't engage in abstractions. He doesn't know what a nation is, because he was never so overtaught as to ignore what his eyes and mind were telling him. Instead, looking at the businesses and the governments and the popular uprisings, he sees a pair of green eyes and a dark face, with a story of decades all his own, a family to support, a life to defend, and shame to carry, he sees a tall, confident businessman at the top of his game entrusted with performing well for his board of directors, he sees a top member of the Communist Party in China and a young child with his entire life ahead of him and an old man with his entire life behind him.

As the youngest child of a Minneapolis ballbearing manufacturing vice president and a navy mother in the 1950's, Friedman was always a bit strange. At a time when gender roles were preset, obligations were expected and life was supposed to be peaceful and sweet, Tom instead had a mother who alternated homemaking, bookkeeping, bridge championships, and telling stories about benchpressing on Navy destroyers, and a father who manufactured things that people don't buy in stores and don't usually know are important or in high demand. (The name of the company was "United Bearing.")

Thomas himself wanted to be a professional golfer, though this was not quite so unusual in the days of Bobby Jones and televised bridge, only to discover a love of journalism and the Middle East. What's more, he discovered a Journalism teacher who did a splendid job of keeping him out of Journalism college. She taught him well enough that he "never needed, or [took], another course in journalism since." As Thomas rightly points out, "Hattie was a woman who believed that the secret for success in life was getting the fundamentals right. And boy, she pounded the fundamentals of journalism into her students -- not simply how to write a lead or accurately transcribe a quote, but, more important, how to comport yourself in a professional way and to always do quality work." Now there's a lesson for all of us! Why not, instead of being Grammar Nazis and focusing on all sorts of ridiculous conventions and overtaught nonsense, we actually try to do our jobs? Still, she was no slouch: "Hattie was the toughest teacher I ever had." No one utters those words without meaning them.

Thomas, in college, took a major normally reserved for indecisive spoiled children and football players, and actually made good with it! He earned a BA in "Mediterranean Studies," and probably set a record for most classes towards a BA in Mediterranean Studies taken without falling asleep on a desk. He followed this up with a truly serious M.Phil. in "Middle Eastern Studies" from Oxford, then got a UPI job as a general assignment reporter in London, on Fleet Street. In London, he married an Economist, from Iowa, whose father built an asset-trading company that invested primarily in shopping malls. UPI later sent him to Beirut, where he would play golf next to a Palestinian military firing range.

From strange lives come important realizations, and when you live like Friedman, how can you possibly see people as groups? How can you ever again stereotype Navy sailors, Bookkeepers and Housewives when your mother was all three? How can you dismiss a business as unimportant when your father worked for a business once dismissed that way? Especially when, as it turns out, ball bearings are actually useful for a great many things...

Not surprisingly, many people are upset at Friedman, and the reason always seems to be the same. They drone on and on about corrupt officials, Halliburton, that administration from which only evil can be expected et cetera and so on! Every time, it's a group, a bunch of people, rather then one person making decisions. It's thoughts made long ago, against the efficient and effective clarity of living in the now. It's giving up on people, and in the end, life. We can't expect to achieve anything because the people are evil, and yet, not long ago, someone very different from Friedman suggested a way out:

"Ambition must be made to counteract ambition" -James Madison

Even if someone intends on doing wrong, you can use their actions against them. Thus, you are still an individual, as other people themselves can be used as well as helpful. And I'm not even looking yet at the potential of teaching a person something they didn't know. So many people, however, teach us that you are not an individual, but that some kind of group or category exists, when in all my life, I have spotted many strange things but have never once seen a collective!

Thus, Friedman looks only at individuals, and leaves the stereotypes at home. Sometimes it really is that simple to create something truly great, a single good idea, a single good method. Stephen Marshall was write to label Friedman the scribe of the new revolution. The remarkable thing, however, is just how little Friedman had to do. Think of how short Friedmans career is, and subtract away how much of it he has spent writing shameful propaganda, and we see just how absurd the thing is that Friedman has rebelled against.

As an aside, I love High Tories, even though I will never be one. Why, you ask? Because they get it. They understand that there is no such thing as a collective, only individualisms with hierarchy, and individualisms without it, and any number of gray areas in between. You can say you're part of something bigger, but what THING is it? It can only be a person you owe fealty to, as a person is all that exists.

Out West Newspaper

WyrdLight-McCallum www.wyrdlight.eu, license: c.c.a.s.a 2.5-gen

Have you ever wondered where to buy a wooden Indian? Do you want to know how the border between US and Canada was made, or what crazy German (hint) thought of it? Do you like puns made by extremely cheesy Western small business owners? Is your mind dirty with jokes about outhouses? Do you just love photographs of wide open roads?

If so, have we got a treat for you! "Out West was a quarterly "on-the-road" newspaper founded in 1987 by roving editor/reporter Chuck Woodbury, who spent much of the following 13 years exploring the two-lane highways of the American West in an RV searching for stories about whatever he found interesting." No longer published, having printed its last issue in 2000 with a final subscription base of 10,000, this gem of the open road is now almost totally available online for free, along with links to resources about RV's, RV camps, a bookstore in an RV, and lots of crazy odd pictures that once showed up in the magazine.

I found this magazine by mistake when searching for a good short history of the Pig War, the almost conflict (in some ways analogous to what is currently happening in Egypt, but a bit more toned down) that ended with Kaiser Wilheim I proclaiming an official, general, easily recognizable border between America and British possessions in North America. In finding it, the pictures and content immediately made me miss home, and the wide open spaces of Washington State along with the humor and charm of its people. In particular, no where else in the world would a electric company put up a sign saying:

"Let us remove your shorts"

Or would you find a business that specializes in shipping Wooden Indians!

The eccentricities and hopeful love that the writer, Chuck Woodbury, showcased are great attributes of the great land called simply the West, and though many people have cried and sung about its passing away, really, it's still there. It's changed a bit, the industries and jobs are different, and in a few places open space has been lost, but overall, the West is still live and well.

We'd recommend this great old paper to anyone!

Chuck Woodbury still runs a blog of short, about bi-monthly posts out of rvtravel.com. Our Prayers are with him over recent loss, and that he may stay as lively and curious as he has always been and, with promise, will always be. He still travels and lives life with wonder as he did in his Out West Newspaper days.

Article Critique

Open Clip Art Library. Public Domain.

I am not posting this post to the top of my blog list, as it is not, in my mind, 100% original, even though I have violated no laws and plagarized no one in writing it. Rather, it is a critique, and not wanting to be subservient to anyone, I will not post it, under any condition, to the top of my list.

Update 10/12/2010: CNN writes an inferior version of the same article I am critiquing.

I am normally a huge fan of the Guardian. They are quite possibly the greatest left-wing newspaper in the world, with high quality artistic prose, good summaries of important stories, and honest, intelligent editorials from a rational leftists perspective. However, this particular editorial I cannot endorse.

It executes, among other things, a major "No True Scotsmen" fallacy (LOL, it's from Britain) in deciding that opposing people who made irresponsible decisions with their money IS opposing the working and middle class, when these are the very people that the Tea Party seeks to save from growing government inteference, high taxes, a lack of choice and freedom, and worst of all, the stifling of their very spirit as Americans, the spirit that the working-class and the middle-class love more then anyone, their storge, in their darkest hour, keeps them alive, and like a little girl wanting to throw a wildcat in a cage to "take care of it," people like Obama would deprive them of the thing these people love most. The Tea Party, like the working class, opposes the bailouts to bankers and high-flying corporate aristocrats that steal the futures of working class children.

The Tea Party also opposes the partisan industrial complex that was best summarized by Anarchists 6 years ago who chanted, on the eve of the 2004 election, "Bush, Kerry, are the same, the only difference is the name." The PIC has been a curse to the entire continent of North America for many years now, and, among other things, endorsed the spending, corruption and ruinous habits that have both deprived our working class of their jobs and threatened their say in the workings of our democracy, while ruining the careers of politicians, like the Late Washington Congresswoman Jennifer Dunn, who sought to correct the course of our nation from this horrific treason against democracy.

Many readers of this editorial will excuse the errors by saying, "well, they are a far-right doctrine, just like Fascism," and my response to them will be, "no, actually." Here again we have a fallacy of definition. "Right-wing" has been redefined tremendously since the 1940's, is a term whose meaning changes nearly every year. To correctly assess similarities between the Tea Party and the doctrine of Fascism we would have to use the definition of Right-wing that fit Fascism, a definition that includes a state-endorsed aristocracy and elite, collectivization and tyrannical nationalism, the very things that the Tea Party opposes with a passion.

And again the editorials errs by saying, accusingly, "But polling shows that when it comes to poverty, the elderly and education, if anything people want to do more rather than less." For once in a long time, a Gaurdian article has referenced a Washington Post article that is its superior. While it is true that many Tea Party members would be very pleased if certain measures were taken on behalf of the poor, the elderly, and our education system, it is also true that the Tea Party, as a noncentralized grassroots organization very much of the Anarchist spirit, can change course very quickly, and once those who threaten the ability of government to handle its responsiblities well have been politically destroyed, from Republican Mike Castle in Delaware to Democrat Harry Reid in Nevada, the Tea Party can change course quickly, and wield the same power that put Christine O'Donnell on Delawares ballot to assure that our poor are taken care of reasonably well. Like the Great Hordes of Genghis Khan, maneuvers, formations and armor mean nothing to the Tea Party readying for battle on its grassroots steppe and out of its hundreds of buckskin tents.

The ability to make compromises will prove crucial at such a point in deciding whether the Tea Party can survive such a maneuver, though the public opinion and grassroots apparatus alone assure that an attempt will be made, but here I resort to a great French mathematician named Pascal. The worse thing that could happen is that, after destroying these particular Democrats, the Tea Party splits up, and new Democrats (but new ones) ascend to the congressional leadership. If such happens, we have made a powerful statement of the ability of the American people to hold their politicians accountable, and our new liberals will be more rational and responsible, perhaps more like the Guardian when they haven't gone crazy, when they ascend to congressional leadership. The best thing that could happen, on the other hand, is the people destroying the political party as we know it for good, and replacing it with true civic involvement at all levels of legislation. Perhaps even if they do split, they will proceed to conquer the two American parties and subject them to their barbarian rule.

Thus, either way, a Tea Party member wins his wager. Even the conservatives among them will appreciate a more fair and reasonable liberal hand should that happen, and all will appreciate the people rising to leadership if that should happen. Either one of these would be an acceptable goal of and by itself, and they are the set of possibilities. Thus, my congressional democrats - check... mate.