WOOF! Watchdogs of Our Freedom

Archive for September, 2013|Monthly archive page

RIGHT BLACK AT YOU! Playing the race card on the side of the angels!

In "Tastefully avoiding puns with the word 'race' in them" forum on September 30, 2013 at 12:30 am
The King of Soul was a Republican? True that! And he wasn't alone!

The King of Soul was a Republican? True that! And he wasn’t alone!

We here in the WOOF cave have been thinking, and since we are tired of discussing Syria and haven’t got anything breaking on Benghazi since our last expose, and since we just reminded ourselves last article about Michel Foucault’s theory of truth as popular discourse, and since we like to fly in the face of “truth” according to popular discourse whenever truth demands it— well, we decided to talk about something completely different!

Actually, we decided to talk about Blacks voting slavishly (forgive the expression) Democrat, and ask a general question: Why on earth do they do that? It rather reminds us of America’s Jewish voters who file to the voting booths each election to vote (slavishly, you should excuse the expression) for liberal candidates who would gladly sell Israel down the river while striking alliances with Islamic terror movements and lobbyists in order to institute a fascistic state in this country, led perhaps in perpetuity by a president so intensely anti-Israeli that he went out of his way to embarrass Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House (check it out here if you don’t recall it) and has shown nothing but contempt for our Israeli allies over the five agonizing years of his presidency to date. But Jewish American voters, we will remonstrate with you at a later date. Meanwhile—


Roughly translated from the Gaelic:”Ethnic groups have always supported their own, and you just have to expect it, it’s only human!” (Okay, very roughly!)

Black American voters, what’s with this Democrat stuff?  We here at WOOF repeatedly ask Black Americans why they vote democratic, and this goes way beyond the obvious fact that Barack Obama is a Black candidate for whom Blacks voted in large part owing to feelings of what might be described as “community” loyalty; and this despite the fact that the Bamster’s mom was starkly Caucasian. (Thus, the New York Times would routinely describe our president as a “White African American” if their editorial policy were consistent with their invention of the “White Hispanic” racial category during the Zimmerman case. But that’s not important now.) Heck, the Irish vote for Irish folks, the Polish vote for Polish folks, the Catholics voted largely for JFK and the Mormon’s predominantly vote for Mormons (and the Bible Belt apparently sits out elections rather than vote for Mormons, leading to four more years of the White African American guy—but we digress). Our point is, we can understand why Obama nailed the Black vote—and we can even understand why people who were not Black voted for him simply to drive home the fact that a Black man could win the presidency—at least the first time around. So let’s exclude Obama from the discussion. (What a great idea, we’re glad we thought of it!) We still want to know why Blacks would vote Democrat on every other occasion! And to be perfectly honest, we have never received a meaningful answer to our question.

Almost invariably the replies have something to do with civil rights. Some of us at WOOF teach at universities where entire classrooms of 20-something students of all races will inform us that the Democrat party has always led the fight for civil and voting rights legislation. Many simply refuse to believe the Republican Party led the way in passing the majority of landmark pieces of legislation designed to ensure Black civil rights, and often over the loud objections of segregationist Democrats (like Al Gore’s daddy and Lyndon Baines Johnson).

Alveda King shares a spiritual moment with an unidentified chubbie friend.

Alveda King shares a spiritual moment with an unidentified chubby friend.

It is true, although largely ignored or ranted to derision by Leftwing media shouters, that Frederick Douglas,Sojourner Truth , Harriet Tubman, George Washington Carver, Mary McLeod Bethune, Jackie Robinson, and Martin Luther King Sr, all favored the Republican party. Alveda King, in fact, remains an outspoken conservative. It is somewhat ironic, therefore that LBJ’s horrendous term-and-a-half in office (the Great Society, as he mordantly called it) solidified the idea of Blacks as beholden to the socialist Left, even as Johnson stuck poorer Black Americans in hellish Government high rises and ensured the destruction of the Black nuclear family by dolling out mammoth funding for children born out of wedlock.

The conscience of a conservative

LBJ wore several faces on Civil Rights, from raving segregationist to opportunistic supporter.

LBJ wore several faces on Civil Rights, from raving segregationist to opportunistic supporter.

But here’s the money shot: Once elevated to the presidency by the murder of Jack Kennedy, LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a substantially weaker version of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, which he fought tooth and nail during his Senate career. But nobody remembered that part. The clash of the candidates in 1964 was defined in large degree by the Civil Rights issue, and the Democratic candidate (Lyndon Johnson) signed it, while the Republican candidate, Barry Goldwater, voted against it.  Goldwater (who refused to take leadership of the postwar Air Guard in Arizona unless it was desegregated, thus making it the first fully desegregated military unit in American history) was cast as the racist reactionary, while LBJ, the ranting Senatorial segregationist who called Black people “nigras” was cast as the champion of African Americans, whom he privately described as “uppity.” How did this come to pass?

Goldwater based his vote against the Civil Rights Act on his view that it obtruded undue federal authority upon the affairs of the several states in contravention of the 10th amendment, as well as the Constitutional right of the individual to do or refuse to do business with whomever he chose. He was right in principle, but wrong contrasted against the zeitgeist—and was branded a racist by the media, most Black Americans, and a tremendous number of White Americans, most of whom remained unaware of the Senator’s personal abhorrence of, and battles against, racial segregation in Arizona.

Goldwater desegregated the Arizona Air Guard , had lunch, and climbed into an F-86. Where's the gratitude?

Goldwater desegregated the Arizona Air Guard , had lunch, and climbed into an F-86. Where’s the gratitude?

Lyndon Johnson had a slightly less Constitutional rationalization for his position on the bill. Aboard Air Force One he told two beaming Democrat governors, “I’ll have those n—s voting Democratic for the next 200 years!”  No, he didn’t say “nigras” that time. And while WOOF abhors LBJ’s rehearsal of that most infamous racial epithet (and while we edited it in keeping with our editorial refusal to allow racial slurs on our site) we cannot deny his claim. Sadly, it proved accurate, despite the fact, buried by liberal historians and media potentates, that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed by a majority of Republican votes against rear-guard Democratic opposition.

So, as the execrable Vladimir Ilyich Lenin asked in completely different circumstances, what is to be done?  Well, most Conservatives seem to believe that the case must be made to America’s Black voters that their entire perception of Civil Rights is askew and ought to be adjusted in accordance with the facts. But WOOF sees this as a fool’s errand akin to trying to persuade the average “millennial” that we don’t currently spend enough on our military to ensure that he will remain free to play “Call of Duty” in his mom’s basement. It is achingly true, all right, but impossible to “message,” as they say on Madison Avenue.

"Dude! You're a racist?"

“Dude! You’re a racist?”

Consider the real problem. How many times has some benighted liberal earnestly suggested to you, unless you are Black, that your refusal to support Our Beloved Helmsman is assignable to his race?  Many will be able to reply “every time,”  and do so without exaggerating. We at WOOF like to remind our critics of this stripe that in 2008 we proudly strode into the voting booth and cast our ballots for an exciting candidate whom WOOF endorsed, and who we believed possessed the brains, the vigor, and the creative insight to solve our nation’s problems and who, we like to add, shamelessly taking up the bromidic PC chestnut, “just happened to be Black.” As you can well imagine, the delighted response to this news is invariably, “Oh! So you DID vote for President Obama!” to which we reply, “Heavens, no, we wouldn’t vote for that communist—we voted for Alan Keyes!” (And if that wasn’t true, we couldn’t say it on the Internet!)

Who is Alan Keyes?


All right, so that’s cute, and that’s correct. But what does it prove? Nothing except that we voted in Blue states that were clearly going for Obama anyway, thus we could proudly lodge our protest votes without costing (ugh!) McCain any electoral gains, and feel principled in the process. But what we want to emphasize here is the typical reaction to our sprung gambit, and the almost invariable reaction from men and women of color; that being, “Who is Alan Keyes?”  Well, he’s the guy who got his doctorate at Harvard and went to work at the State Department under the amazing Jeane Kirkpatrick and was appointed ambassador to the UN, and who, Reagan later said,”did such an extraordinary job … defending our country against the forces of anti-Americanism.” He’s the guy who once ran against the leftist drudge Paul Sarbanes in Maryland’s 1988 senatorial race, devastating Sarbanes so utterly in a televised debate that the local PBS affiliate that sponsored the event broadcast the result at 2AM on a Monday. Keyes got clobbered in the election, possibly because on the eve of balloting, pollsters revealed that the average Black citizen of Baltimore did not know who he was. How is that possible?  In 1992 Keyes ran again for a Maryland Senate seat, this time against Barbara Mikulski, the Old Line State’s perennial Menshevik munchkin. He scraped together 29% of the vote, which in ultra-blue Maryland, against the inexplicably adored Mikulski, and despite a local press establishment that militantly ignored or dismissed his candidacy for the second time, was an impressive achievement.

alan_keyes When Keyes, a principled and unalterable conservative, sought the Republican nomination in 2000 he was included, grudgingly, in the debates. He finished 3rd in Iowa, finished 2ndin eight other primaries, drew 20% of the vote in Utah’s primary— and survived the rest of the field to debate McCain and “W” for the nomination. Yet as “W” squared off against Albert Gore, most Americans could not have identified Alan Keyes had he showed up at their doorsteps to say howdy.  Perhaps even more notably, Keyes was hurried into the 2004 Senate election in Illinois by a panicky Republican party whose candidate (Jack Ryan—but not the one in the Clancy novels, unfortunately) dropped out of the race because of a sex scandal. Keyes’s entry into the competition came with less than three months remaining before Election Day. He was handed two-and-a-half million for his campaign, whereas the Left supplied his opponent with upwards of 14 million. Keyes was beaten, of course, and his opponent, a young Marxist named Barack Obama, achieved a 43% margin of victory, the largest Senate margin in Illinois history. And still, no remembrance of Keyes’s role in events?  The media realize that Alan Keyes is a walking press release—and that’s why they play him down.

The most media attention Keyes gained during his presidential bid in 2000 was when he consented to be tossed into a mosh pit as a lark. The media were aghast, of course!

Actually, the most media attention Keyes gained during his presidential bid in 2000 was when he consented to be tossed into a mosh pit as a lark. The media were aghast, of course! (We forget why.)

Jamelle Bouie, Black leftist and opinionist for The American Prospect has pointed out that even a modest increase in black support for a Republican presidential candidate — to Bush’s anomalous 2004 levels, for instance — would dramatically shift the odds in a presidential run-off. In an unusually selfless frame of mind, Bouie suggested that a solid GOP effort to recruit Black voters would be a better use of time and money than the party’s traditional genuflections to Latinos. In an equally selfless frame of mind, WOOF strongly concurs (boy, will Jamelle be pleased to hear that!) although we also continue to believe that all Latinos should be conservatives. Of course, we believe that all liberals should be conservatives, but we digress.

Maddow underperforms Keyes in the same MSNBC time slot--but keeps her job. Lucky for her she's not a Black conservative!

Maddow underperforms Keyes in the same MSNBC time slot–but keeps her job. Lucky for her she’s not a Black conservative!

Keyes is a man who is newsworthy in every respect, but his very existence was treated as a state secret by the Liberal Establishment Media wherever he sojourned. When MSNBC gave him a prime-time program it was abruptly cancelled after 5 months. Everyone agreed that ratings were not an issue, until a spokesperson for MSNBC decided they really must have been an issue, declaring, “His ratings aren’t the strongest,” which is simply to say his time slot was up against the monumentally successful O’Reilly.  Despite this, Keyes’s worst-rated month averaged 213,000 Nielsen households tuned into Keyes’s program each evening. Consider that last month, MSNBC’s flagship program, The Rachel Maddow Show attracted an average viewership of only 173,000 prime-time viewers per telecast—so maybe Keyes should be offered a mammoth re-signing bonus? (No, they’re bringing Ed Schultz back to the 5PM slot—that’ll do it!)

And they always look so natural!

And they always look so natural!

The fact is this: the Liberal Establishment Media harbor an abject terror of significant numbers of Black Americans drifting to the political right. WOOF knows you are probably laughing right now, dear readers—that your beverage of preference may in fact be squirting out your nostrils as you strive to control yourself and avoid tumbling from your chair in unchecked hilarity. Okay, in the immortal words of Daffy Duck, “Ha, ha, ‘tis to laugh!” But think about it for a moment. What conceivable reason does any Black American have for voting Democrat? And in particular, why vote for White elitists who have no use for Black Americans after they’ve sung a few spirituals with them in their churches for photo ops? What benefit has accrued to the Black population of America over the past 40 years as a result of its dogged loyalty to the Democrat party? Coming up with anything? Of course not.

Now, some will occasionally assert that Bobby Kennedy put a call through to Martin Luther King during the 1960 election when King was in jail in Georgia on a trumped up charge. Nixon didn’t—and that’s a fact—but that would be a scant bit of history to squander a race’s future over, even if it could not be demonstrated that Nixon and King were in fact close, had met numerous times, and that King wrote Nixon praising his “assiduous labor and dauntless courage in seeking to make the Civil Rights Bill [of 1957] a reality,” and for his “devotion to the highest mandates of the moral law.” The letter is available for viewing at the Nixon Presidential Library in Yorba Linda, California.

nixon and king

We tried to think of what the Left could say about this annoyingly expository photo–and then we thought, maybe it’s cropped!

Apart from the alliance, more perceptual than actual, between the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, and Kennedy’s willingness to deploy the national guard to move George Wallace out of a school house doorway, thwarting Governor Wallace’s infamous stand against school desegregation at the University of Alabama, there has not been a Democrat initiative of any help whatsoever to Blacks since Harry Truman desegregated the military in 1948 (following, one might argue, the lead of  Goldwater who had already desegregated it in Arizona). No single population group, in fact, has been more heartlessly immiserated by Democrat economic policies than American Blacks.

See Governor Wallace blocking the door so Black students can't go to school? He's a Democrat!

See Governor Wallace blocking the door so Black students can’t go to school? He’s a Democrat!

So long as Black conservatives are an undiscovered species, wandering the political wilderness somewhere in the mythic mist, like a rumored tribe of Sasquatch, those who wander out of the wild and expose themselves publicly can be ridiculed into inutility with ease. Like the Patterson film, to pursue the metaphoric conceit—but that’s not important now. What’s important is this: The media and the Democrat party they serve are joined in a conspicuous concordat to deliberately ignore or perniciously malign Blacks who are conservatives—indeed, to ignore or sneeringly berate any Black whose views place him to the proximal right of Bobby Seale.

Besides all the Jim Crow political cartoons that the Left giggled at, we had the more concerted efforts to remind Blacks that they belong in the designated party!

Besides all the Jim Crow political cartoons the Left giggled at, we had the more concerted efforts to remind Blacks that they belong in the designated party!

The motivation is a deep seated fear that America’s Black population might be to any extent swayed to the political right by a few exemplary individuals and particularly that such individuals might gain prominence in numbers too large to permit the Left’s isolate-and-denigrate tactics to function against them (as they’ve done in the past against “uppity” Blacks—LBJ’s term, not ours–like Clarence Thomas and Condi Rice who refused to toe the line and play the roles assigned them by the White Left and the White Left’s in-house servitors like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson). The Liberal Establishment Media fear this so intensely that they will stop at nothing to isolate and savage any Black man or woman who takes a stand against the “Borg.” As an example, look at the amount of fire power focused on Herman Caine during the 2012 primaries the moment he broke away as front runner. The solution to this problem is to overwhelm the system with forced exposure of the Black right, and in so doing to impress upon the Black citizenry, as well as Whites, Hispanics, Asians, and so on—that Black conservatism and libertarianism exist, and bear no resemblance to the Uncle Tom-ism so widely ascribed to them. People are not unaware of this because they are stupid, they are unaware of this because it is deliberately kept from them.  The lesson to be taught here must be taught through exemplification, not rhetoric—we need Conservative Blacks in the face of the nation, and this will require a focused effort, particularly in the new media. Okay, so besides Alan Keyes, who are these people? Well, they are increasingly numerous, praise be to God, but let’s check out a sampler.

050421_janiceBrown_bcol.grid-2x2 Janis Rogers Brown is so brilliantly, capably conservative, a young Senator Barack Obama actually set aside voting “present” and made a speech on the floor of the Senate attempting to obstruct her appointment to the DC Court of Appeals—she made it anyway. “Google” the speech for its entertainment value—Obama was particularly antagonized by Brown’s tendency to “use her position in the courts to advocate for increased protections for property owners,” but he enumerates many other shocking offenses, all equally blatant sins against the collective. But Janice Rogers Brown is not merely a savvy jurist who upsets Marxists, she is an outspoken champion of liberty who was dunned by an aghast Washington Post for observing as far back as 2005 that “In the heyday of liberal democracy, all roads lead to slavery.” Brown is also an excursive reader who quotes Cicero, the Apostle Paul, Hayek, Ayn Rand and Paul Simon with equal insight. She belongs on the Supreme Court, and she belongs front and center in the American discourse. In these desperate times the woman who long ago warned that “”If we can invoke no ultimate limits on the power of government, a democracy is inevitably transformed into a kleptocracy – a license to steal, a warrant for oppression,” deserves considerably more national attention!

Thomas Sowell is sometimes referred to by Rush Limbaugh as “the smartest man in America,” and without demonstrable hyperbole. Most Americans have no idea he exists because he has done nothing so important that the Left traipses after him begging his observations as they do, say, the socialist drone Cornel West or the boresomely acerbic Spike Lee. Sowell grew up in Harlem, dropped out of high school and joined the Marines in time for the Korean “police action.” Afterwards, Sowell earned his bachelor’s degree from Harvard University (without the benefit of affirmative action) and went on to earn his master’s degree from Colombia University. In 1968, he received a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, one of the last bastions of Austrian-school laissez-faire economics. He has held professorships at Cornell and University of California, Los Angeles and taught economics at Rutgers, Howard University, Brandeis and Amherst College. He’s the winner of the National Humanities Medal and the author of over 30 books. His tendentious alacrity in defense of libertarian economic principles is always attention grabbing, and yet somehow he is rarely called upon by network programmers to present Black analysis—or any analysis. Instead, we get Kanye, Whoopi, or the amusingly dysfunctional Touré, who recently offered his viewers a “geography refresher” by explaining that Kenya is “on the north coast of Africa” which must have surprised everyone in Kenya, and a dozen or so MSNBC viewers.  


Thomas Sowell–not Toure–perish the thought!

Allen West has been a WOOF favorite ever since the PC Brigade forced him into early retirement from the Army following an incident in which he fired his sidearm near the head of suspected Iraqi spy to persuade that previously recalcitrant individual to reveal the location of an ambush laid for West’s men. Since leaving the Army Colonel West has only made us fonder of him. A tea party favorite he won a congressional seat in Florida’s 22nd district in 2010 and proceeded to use it as a pulpit from which to shellac the liberal AllenWest1establishment, and to indite 80 of his colleagues for being communists. For some reason, this upset the media elites, who accused West of making unfounded accusations rather than congratulating him on his circumspection. After being gerrymandered and electioneered out of office in 2012 and defeated by a raving, half-witted and arguably degenerate White kid, (Patrick Murphy), West began duty as a FOX News commentator, but hurling him back into the political arena at the first opportunity is absolutely essential to the commonweal, and WOOF is determined to see Colonel West back in office somewhere or other as soon as possible, witness our not unrecent effort to move him to South Carolina in time for appointment by Niki Haley to the Senate in the wake of Jim DeMint’s precipitate departure [available here]. Governor Haley obviously missed our irresistibly logical proposal, she having appointed Tim Scott to the vacancy rather than follow our “moving West” strategy, but Allen’s return to the political arena must remain a priority for the conservative movement!

Tim Scott is next, just to prove there are no hard feelings. He has performed marvelously since his insertion into the Senate and just voted no on cloture on the continuing resolution (that’s a good thing, and also rather gutsy). He is smart, personable, and makes sense as a former business owner when he rips into Harry Reid’s mismanagement of the budgetary process. We will admit that Niki Haley was wise to appoint him, although her rebuff of our more creative approach still stings a bit, frankly. Meanwhile, Scott continues to make sound arguments against the fiscal insanity of Congressional spending practices in common sense language, and deserves to be spotlighted. And this brings up a major issue toward which we will now cleverly and subtly steer our focus!

We know what you’re thinking: our focus was supposed to be on Black conservatives, so what are we talking about—well, our point remains that Black conservatism isn’t problematic because it doesn’t exist, it is problematic only because its exposure is stifled by the Liberal Establishment Media. As we said earlier, (several times now, we know!) one of the most horrifying possibilities haunting the Liberal imagination is that of a split Black vote with a respectable segment peeling away from the Democrats. To obviate such a catastrophe the network news organizations that constitute a major portion of the Left’s propaganda arm avoid discussion of Black conservatism and Black conservatives (the Keyes treatment), unless it is to savage them and question their sanity (the West treatment) or by launching and then ignoring  Jim Crow-style assaults such as the racially denigrative cartoon images of Condi Rice that neither the networks nor the NAACP saw fit to criticize. So can we convert the networks? Hardly. We must do what the new conservative media have been doing since Limbaugh resurrected AM radio, and circumvent them.  Expect no help from the RINO establishmentarians–they are as lethargic on this issue as they are on immigration or Obamacare…no, the new media will have to promote this cause without the old media or the Old Boy Republicans, but  that’s okay, we can do this ourselves. And when a given individual is Black, conservative, and adept at such circumvention, the value of that individual to the conservative effort is treble.  Some examples include:

Crystal Wright:  is a communications consultant and the blogmistress of “Conservative Black Chick” [listed below in WOOF LINKS, or just click here]. Her BA in English is from Georgetown University Cynthia Wrightand she holds a Masters of Fine Arts in Theatre from Virginia Commonwealth University. She is also the major player at the Baker Wright Group, LLC which she describes as a “full service public relations firm, specializing in communications counseling, media relations, message development, media training and crisis communications.” Her blog, she writes, was born in part from frustration with “people telling me that as I’m a black woman I couldn’t be a Republican and should be a Democrat because of the mere color of my skin.” She has excited several Leftist commentators, some of whom are Black, to rant against her as a phony and an attention grabber. She is certainly the latter—and if she came only recently to the conservative cause, we are no less pleased to have her aboard!

Francesca Chambers, in the same vein, is the Editor of “Red Alert Politics” [see WOOF links or just click here]– a blog aimed where a lot more blogs ought to be aimed: at young francesca chambersconservatives, or more to the point, young people who may be inclined to conservatism once they hear about it from someone other than their balding, pony-tailed, vitriol-spewing college professors. Francesca was graduated from the University of Kansas with double BAs, one in Journalism and the other in Political Science. She lives in Washington, D.C. where she has thus far managed to avoid the inside-the-Beltway body-snatcher phenomenon, but is reportedly inclined to relocate to Virginia, which inclination WOOF ardently endorses. Francesca is also a contributor to The Washington Examiner, has spoken at the Leadership Institute, Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, and CPAC. She also does a lot of TV, so that the cyberspacially challenged can catch her message on ABC’s Nightline, the PBS News Hour and The Blaze, and has even done missionary work to MSNBC, CNN, and NPR. Francesca typifies the kind of young conservative Black woman whom the media would love to ignore but cannot avoid, because her presence on line mandates recognition. (And she has the perfect last name for a counterrevolutionary!)

Sonnie Johnson: Again, a blogmistress extraordinaire, Miss Johnson is probably better at taking her conservative blogging right into the ‘hood Johnsonand keeping it street smart than any other blogger of color, and manages at the same time to keep it all beautifully right wing! Items that appear to be trash talk suddenly transform themselves into marvelous political homiles just as essays on foreign developments resolve into analogies of domestic entropy—and Johnson is featured in Fire from the Heartland (a movie expounding the courage and zeal of conservative women, obviously inspired by WOOF [take a look here if you doubt us] as well as in Sarah Palin’s Undefeated. She is an avid Tea Party spokesperson and a passionate proponent of growing the economy by limiting government!  Sonnie’s blog is “Did She Say That” and its listed in WOOF links [or just click here].

Benjamin Carson: Long the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital (before he was discovered to be un-Liberal and carsonousted), made the news with explosive force when he schooled Barack Obama at the annual prayer breakfast by telling him, without really bothering to glance at him or mention him, how bad Obamacare was going to be and, in considerable detail, what could have been done instead. And Carson could not be “spiked” because the event was national news anyway—and besides he was already a bonafide famous Black person because Hollywood had already (oops!) lionized him in a movie entitled Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story in which Carson was portrayed by Cuba Gooding Jr., (and when Hollywood exhorts you in a movie, the Leftwing Establishment Media acknowledge you as real). For these reasons, Carson’s denunciation of the president’s policies were carried even by the dinosaur networks. Carson’s smackdown of the Affordable Health Care Act and other socialist policies was best described by PolicyMic commentator John Giokaris who called it “the longest 27 minutes in Obama’s presidency.” In an interview with Neil Cavuto, Carson shrugged off all the sudden acclaim from the Right and derision from the Left, saying “Somebody has to be courageous enough to stand up to the bullies.”

Chelsi Henry may not look the type to “stand up to the bullies,” but she stands up for conservative values in the minority community.  and is the first Republican in her family. She is Chief of Staff for the National Assembly of Black Republicans as well as the Florida Assembly of Black Republicans, both chartered by the Republican National Committee (but don’t hold that against them) and the Republican Party of Florida. The goal of both organizations is to motivate, educate, and activate minority Republicans.  She received her law degree from the Florida Coastal School of Law, despite being born to a 16 year old mom and raised on food stamps. “It’s not how you start,” she told National Review, “it’s how you finish.”

chelsi chambers

Perhaps not as pretty as the above-cited blog mistresses, but of incalculable value to the conservative cause, Wayne Dupree is the best argument WOOF has thus far encountered for cloning. He is an eight-year Air Force vet from Maryland’s politically superior Eastern Shore who was motivated by Andrew Breitbart (okay, another really good argument for cloning) to carry his pro-American views to the world—a tall order  for most mortals, but see, Wayne is one of those techno-communications solons who can do that sort of thing at the speed of neo-Teslan genius…while we here in the WOOF cave are still wondering if we can possibly figure out photoshop…like, is that different from Power Point? But anyway…Wayne is the CEO of Newsninja2012.com, does guest shots on Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and Glenn Beck (as hosted by Dana Loesch), and declares his readiness to “fight back against the liberal hate machine and meet them head on with like-minded strength and dedication.” Besides delivering public stemwinders, Wayne maintains a Twitter account with upwards of twenty-five thousand followers. His You Tube channel (what’s a You Tube channel?) has amassed two million views and his Facebook account has over five million likes—heck, we’d even like it if we ever looked at Facebook, but they’re commies, right?


Anyway, the takeaway here (as if you haven’t guessed!) is that the growing wave of Black Americans who are dedicatedly conservative must be publicized in ways that reach other Blacks and the country in general, and as with so much else this will mean leapfrogging the mainstream. And those who seem to be best at this task are the Black bloggers, politicians and public personalities who can speak for themselves in the growing arena they are creating. But it is expedient, Woofketeers, that we support their efforts, link to their blogs, and pay heed to the tactical as well as the sociocultural advantages of their participation in our noble cause. And mark our words, gentle readers, front line participation in politics by Black right wingers is the surest way to gain votes in the Black community—and begin the repatriation of America’s citizens of African heritage to the party of Lincoln (or the Tea Party of Lincoln—hey, why not?)

And this concludes our screed on this topic, gentle readers, sorry we didn’t mention Syria, Ted Cruz or the massacre in Kenya—but we’ll get around to it! Meanwhile, support Black right-wing bloggers and expositors, both political and professional, who militate for the Right! We repair now to our cave to await the inevitable congratulatory telegram from the NAACP praising our efforts to draw attention to these superb men and women of African ancestry– but we require no thanks.  Why, these people were standouts even before WOOF mentioned them!

Yup. Ray was a Reaganite!

Ray Charles, too? Yup. Ray was a Reaganite!


COMMON CORE COMETH–Paul Revere, please call your office!

In Just say HUAC forum on September 18, 2013 at 10:49 pm

images stalin

Race to the bottom!

Common Core is coming to your kids’ school, moms and dads—and it wants you to rest assured that it is, to quote its own hype, “internationally benchmarked,” “robust,” “aligned with college and work expectations,” “rigorous,” and “evidence-based.” Unfortunately, every word of that self-bestowed encomium is a bald faced lie, except maybe “rigorous” which is sort of hard to argue about, it being subject to interpretation. You might think the same about “robust,” except that in research terminology “robust” refers to findings that are especially persuasive because they comprise data drawn from a wide range of probability distributions. Suffice it that Common Core’s educational plan possesses no data whatsoever because it’s never been tried anywhere. Until now!

obRemember way back in February of 2009 when our Beloved Helmsman drove the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” through congress? Maybe you’ll remember it more readily if we just say, “the stimulus package?” Right, because calling it the “American Astronomical Deficit Creation Initiative to Bankrupt the Country and Flood Unions and other Traditionally Left-wing Organizations with Money to Serve as a Slush Fund for Democrats while Sending the Rest Abroad or Financing Hopelessly Ridiculous Green Industries that will go Bankrupt Anyway while Doing Absolutely Nothing for the Infrastructure or Creating a Single Job Act” might have been a bit wordy and probably less appealing to the general public. Well, you probably remember being told that a generous chunk of that effusion of Obama’s 800 billion-dollar beau geste was going to help educate your kids, right? And in fact, it was!  Part of the President’s bill states that:

Dear Leader offers guidance to Solyndra technician. Maybe he was pointing the wrong way?

Dear Leader offers guidance to Solyndra technician. Maybe he was pointing the wrong way?

The [stimulus] provides $4.35 billion for the Race to the Top Fund, a competitive grant program designed to encourage and reward States that are creating the conditions for education innovation and reform…” And blah, blah, blah…So what Rappin’ Preezy was actually telling us there, in case you missed it, was that a gargantuan imposition of governmental standards was coming to your kid’s school, straight from the brain trust empowered to “fundamentally transform” our country, because armies of brainwashed, under-educated children would be needed to supinely maintain the people in power tasked with America’s destruction. To effectuate this end, vast amounts of money were offered states that “voluntarily” opted to implement this wondrous new educational plan, so who could possibly resist such an offer? The answer is: Texas, Nebraska Alaska and Virginia. Unfortunately, forty-five other states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity have adopted the Common Core State Standards. Minnesota partially adopted the program.

mindcontThe Obama Administration is engaged in a tenacious and largely successful effort to nationalize American public education in order to ensure that a standard, radically left-wing agenda is taught with near identicality in every public school across America. In order to establish this glossy, superficially attractive curriculum in our children’s schools, the Obamans never sought congressional approval; rather, they flooded states that accepted their educational format with stimulus dollars, and withheld such emoluments from states that resisted. Because the packaging was skillfully handled and Common Core at first glance seems a salubrious means of bringing every school district up to a lofty national standard, it was practically irresistible—although taxpayers in the various states must still foot the bill for state-level implementation, which is a little surprise for the local yokels.

Now you CSCOPE–now you don’t!

splashReaders who recall our previous (and highly successful) battle to save Texas’s children from the Red Menace will detect amazing similarities to the horrific CSCOPE educational plan that was tested in Texas schools [read full WOOF story here] and flunked. Texas scrapped CSCOPE and sought to assign blame for its existence, but the corporation pushing it into Texan schools turned out to be a straw operation and the whole circus vanished in a puff of blue smoke. Where do you suppose it went?

Linda Darling Hammond--outspoken opponent of  the “multiple-choice world"world.”

Linda Darling Hammond–outspoken opponent of the “multiple-choice world.”

Like the Blob, Michael Myers, Freddy Kruger, and Fu Manchu, CSCOPE never died, it simply did what radical liberalism always does when caught and terminated. It changed its name and came right back. We now have Common Core in our schools, right on schedule, which is to say, the same old painted lady in a new dress. Most of the observers of this phenomenon, even some of the sharpest right-wing websites, suppose themselves to be viewing disparate plagues, one of which fizzled, one of which remains—but this is not true, for as Father Merrin tells Father Karras in The Exorcist, “There is only one demon.” In this case, the missing link commonly overlooked by conservatives in a hurry, is Linda Darling Hammond, about whom WOOF has complained previously—and about whom we are about to complain some more! Rigorously, to coin a phrase!

Darn that Steve McQueen! When we need him, he's dead!

Darn that Steve McQueen! When we need him, he’s dead!

Linda Darling Hammond was the chief architect of CSCOPE and its Siamese twin, Common Core.  She is also the author of the subversive, A Flat World and Education: How America’s Commitment to Equity will Determine our Future, and by equity, of course, she means forced equality, which of course, in turn, requires an all-powerful state…which she routinely advocates. Hammond almost single-handedly overrode the learned objections of a small army of educationists (assembled, ironically, by Hammond to serve as Common Core’s “validation committee”) who refused to endorse the Common Core standards.

Bombin'Bill Ayers--from trying to blow up the Pentagon to designing your kid's social studies course!

Bombin’ Bill Ayers–from trying to blow up the Pentagon to designing your kid’s social studies course!

She personally wrote or oversaw the writing of all the enthusiastic assertions of Common Core’s superiority despite an utter dearth of empirical evidence that it was worth a tinker’s damn. She personally wrote or oversaw the writing of the standard tests, and had a hand in the system’s copyrighting, because a girl’s got to make a buck—toward which end Hammond headed Obama’s education-policy team and remains a member of Obama’s subversive Equity and Excellence Commission, the meddlesome EEC.  In her lectures she warns against the dangers of a “multiple choice world” in education–and her speeches make clear her contempt for any sort of choice–period.  Unsurprisingly she is best friends forever with Bombin’ Bill Ayers, the intelligentsia’s favorite unregenerate home-grown terrorist, anti-American polemicist and, somehow or other, education authority. Ayers is a beloved icon of the intellectual establishment. He speaks at teachers associations and Universities where he is treated as royalty, explaining that the job of educators is to help kids “re-imagine citizenry” as a global responsibility because, as he is fond of declaring, “the empire [that’s us, by the way] is declining and that game is over!”

Money Bags

Most Americans think of Bill Gates as the wonky nerd who's not as cool as Apple--but that's because he's got that Bildebreger look going on!

Most Americans think of Bill Gates as the wonky nerd who’s not as cool as Apple–but that’s because he’s got that Bilderberger look going on!

Bill and Melinda Gates are huge supporters of Common Core—and if you think Bill Gates is just a capitalistic wonk with some lovably idiosyncratic habitudes, consider that he is fresh back from co-hosting UNESCO’s eugenics conference in London (because even though Reagan withdrew the United States from UNESCO in 1984 because of its overtly communist agenda, but we are back now, up to our elbows in it, thanks to “W” who explained in 2003 that UNESCO had “reformed,” without explaining the basis for his delusion). Anyhow, Linda and Bill bankroll a considerable portion of Common Core, through their educational foundations. The Gateses are particularly obsessed with throwing billions at education and have produced their share of monumental disasters beginning with their “learning communities” initiative. In fact, between 2000 and 2008 they played havoc with the established school systems in 45 states and the District of Columbia, but their Small Schools Workshop proved a failure, possibly because Bill Gates knows nothing about education—or possibly because his billions are being hurled at American education as a weapon of mass destruction, with or without his cognizance. There are, to be sure, other major players with fat wallets backing the socialist subversion of our public schools (mainly the usual suspects), but the size of the Gates fortune, compounded by the additional billions transferred to him by the Leftist Warren Buffet, dwarfs the war chests of his fellow travelers.

Nowadays, Gates spends a disproportionate amount of time thinking about what he;'d like to do to American education--and then doing it!

Nowadays, Gates spends a disproportionate amount of time thinking about what he’d like to do to American education–and then doing it!

The critics speak– in the wilderness!

Dr. James Milgram--

Dr. James Milgram–refused to sign off on Common Core standards.

Stanford University’s renowned mathematician, James Milgram, studied Common Core in detail and announced that it will put American students 2 years behind their counterparts in other developed nations. He refused to sign off on the standards package, pointing out that the same methods had been adopted first in Russia but had failed there miserably and been replaced. His views were echoed by Professor Jonathan Goodman of New York University who bluntly stated that the Common Core standards represent “significantly lower expectations with respect to algebra and geometry than the published standards of other countries.”

Joy Pullmann--bravely resisting the red tide!

Joy Pullmann–bravely resisting the red tide!

Joy Pullmann of the Heartland Institute ferreted out an internal report by the subversive Department of Education confirming the data mining function of the Common Core agenda—including “using cameras to judge facial expressions, an electronic seat that judges posture, a pressure-sensitive computer mouse and a biometric wrap on kids’ wrists.” Sound like fun, comrades? It’s not just brainwashing, it’s surveillance, too—and at such reasonable rates!

On April 6, even the subversive Washington Post felt compelled to publish a public-school teacher’s letter of resignation that lambasted the program. Gerald Conti, a long-time social studies teacher in New York declared that he could not go on teaching under the Common Core protocols, adding that, “‘Data driven’ education seeks only conformity, standardization…and a zombie-like adherence to the shallow and generic…” Conti went on to warn readers that “Creativity, academic freedom, teacher autonomy, experimentation and innovation are being stifled in a misguided effort to fix what is not broken in our system of public education.” Of course, Conti errs (as do most of Common Core’s critics) in supposing the effort misguided—it is, in fact, every bit and precisely as guided as a cruise missile.

The highly respected software creator Ze’ev Wurman, himself a math expert who served for over a decade as an adviser to California and Washington DC on the subject of mathematics in public schools was taken aback to discover that the program delayed most adding and subtracting until the 4th grade.

Wurman--missing the grunt work!

Wurman–missing the grunt work!

Further examination revealed that students would not be expected to evince finesse in the art of multiplication until 5th grade. The program does not delve into the mysteries of long division until 6th grade, and neglects any serious treatment of fractions, decimals, or algebra. Traditional geometry is replaced within an experimental “conceptual approach” which might be better denominated “geometry appreciation.” (See the pretty shapes?) This system has never been so much as pilot-tested in America. In his lengthy denunciation of the program, Wurman wrote that, “instead of doing the grunt work of hammering times tables and basic functions into kids’ heads first, the faddists have turned to wacky, wordy non-math alternatives to encourage ‘conceptual’ understanding — without any mastery of the fundamentals of math.” (And this was one of the kinder portions of his review!)


But who really needs to do math anymore, right? We all have calculators now anyway—and the Russians took over our space program five years ago, so what’s the bother? Let them do the math! The important stuff is being able to read and write, isn’t it?

imagesccswcWell…you don’t exactly have to know how to read to measure up to Common Core’s “standards.” (Which standards, by the way, are called ‘standards’ in a kind of whimsical sense—they never having been standardized anywhere on earth). The only reason students might have to read all that well is if they were going to tackle those old, really thick books—you know—the ones with no pictures that have hard words in them, like “War and Peace,” or maybe “Moby Dick,” and who wants to read those kinds of books anyway? But hey, Common Core looked at the problem students may encounter trying to read the classics and came up with a hip, postmodern solution. Common Core is de-emphasizing “great literary works.” This de-emphasizing will help your child in several ways. First, he will learn fairness and equality, because it is elitist, biased, ethnocentric and in many respects racist (Huck Finn is gone on that score) to call some books “classics,” while disallowing others as somehow less than classic, just because a bunch of stuffy old Caucasians with a bunch of traditional educations didn’t see their relevance—or worse, didn’t care to see it!  And poetry? Are you kidding? Trying to get a kid to understand some longwinded, symbol-crammed opus by T.S. Elliot or Ezra Pound (who were in any case a conservative Catholic and a fascist, respectively) is ridiculous nowadays. Better to skip such bourgeois gibberish entirely, but when it must be encountered, the Common Core method obviates having any idea what the author was saying—because this turns out to be irrelevant!

“Deconstruction” for the bourgeois in a hurry:

Michel Foucault--don't hate him because he's beautiful.

Michel Foucault–don’t hate him because he’s beautiful.

Do you know what deconstruction is? (No, it didn’t follow the Civil War!) Here is WOOF’s three easy pieces primer on postmodern deconstructionism. Step one: Not long ago there was this Gay bald dude who was very smart, and his name was Michel Foucault. Well, Michel gave voice to the theory that in our modern, media-oriented age, truth is determined not by what is objectively or empirically knowable, but rather by “discourse,” or rather, what the generally accepted opinion is on a societal level of belief and acceptance. This basic replacement of objective reality with socially consensual reality is called “constructivism” and before you run off to France to strangle Michel Foucault, consider two important points: First, you’d be wasting your time because Michel was –er—incautious, as it were, so he died  of AIDS a while back; and second, you really shouldn’t get too mad at him because all he was saying is what any dweller in the age of Obama should have figured out for himself, namely that truth in our time has been replaced by popular supposition, example: Barack Obama is brilliant. Example: Glenn Beck is a racist. Example: Raising taxes increases revenue. Three statements that are born aloft by established discourse, despite having no basis in fact. Get it? By the way, Michel Foucault rejected the postmodernist label because—well—he wasn’t one!

Step two: Building on Foucault’s structuralist/constructivist insights, however, some really nutty French philosophers like Jacques Derrida and some home-grown specimens like Richard Rorty have expanded Foucault’s thinking into the complete rejection of any reality beyond whatever seems actual in the subjective view of the percipient. So how crazy is that? But this sort of thinking has been moving into American education for decades now, and in its most observable form it operates as literary “deconstruction.”

Sorry Huck and Jim--looks like the great novels are Gone With the Wind!

Sorry Huck and Jim–looks like the great novels are Gone With the Wind!

Step three: So, if your kid has to read, say, Great Expectations, and he doesn’t understand it, that’s not a problem, because from the standpoint of deconstructionism, the book means whatever he says it means, and if he is creative and imaginative in suggesting that the book is about, say, a mental patient driven nuts by the British industrial age who thinks he sees an old woman catch fire and then realizes he’s crazy and can’t figure out whether he catches the girl he’s after or not, because he worked too much without any social support and wound up in a psychotic trance—well, that’s great, because that’s what the book means to your kid. Full points! Your kid won’t be encountering too many “great books,” anyhow, because the Common Core emphasis is on “alternative literacies” (got that?)  These tend to be works, literary or otherwise, deemed more “relevant” to your kid’s social and artistic concerns—so he can read the lyrics to Eminem’s latest CD, or explain what he got out of viewing an episode of “True Blood” on TV, and score just as well as if he completely and plausibly explicated “Finnegan’s Wake.”  Unsurprisingly, themes involving “social justice” are especially encouraged. As veteran educator Mary Black, program monitor at the Texas Education Agency and faculty at the University of Texas Austin warns in her widely circulated critique of the new standards, “The literary classics have been stripped and replaced with books promoting a socialist agenda…. It is certain that it will leave students unable to think for themselves.” Mary Black has a gift for concision!

indexmmIn case you haven’t figured it out yet, moral relativism is the life’s blood of Common Core. ..but this is moral relativism played by Marxian dialecticians who view relativism as the great equalizer. Brahms? No better than Ludacris.  DaVinci? On a par with, maybe, David Wojnarowicz. The Declaration of Independence? Why not Howl by Ginsberg? Or the Vagina Monologues? It all depends on what Johnny gets out of them personally…and the basic subtext is, as Bob Dylan suggested in an entirely different context, “nothing is better, nothing is best…” Grades, for obvious reasons, are dispensed with in Common Core—they being impossible to reconcile with a leveling egalitarianism which aims to eliminate such elitist concepts while annihilating individual belief in order to impose a meta-belief system–the basic ingredient of all brain washing. The Common Core folks call it globalization, but you may safely consider it communism—that same old painted lady, with a United Nations flag for a shawl.

Sandra Stotsky, an English professor at the University of Arizona, was an early critic of the Common Core approach to English, calling it, “An English curriculum overloaded with advocacy journalism or with ‘informational’ articles chosen for their topical and/or political nature,” and you may rest assured, gentle readers, that the advocacy comes entirely from the Left.

and Common Core is said not to permit dropping out--now that seems un-American just in itself, doesn't it?

…and Common Core is said not to permit dropping out–now that seems un-American just in itself, doesn’t it?

History…a dish best served cold?  

Then of course there is the problem of history, a subject that stirs so little enthusiasm from Common Core that much of its teaching is allocated to English Departments (and thus to educators who know nothing in particular about history). You might think that such abhorrent practices would anger teachers-and to an extent this is so. But the teachers, in many cases, do not get the big picture. Like honest citizens clucking their tongues over the president’s inexperience (as if Obama spent 5 years running the country into the ground because he just doesn’t know any better), many an educator seems persuaded that Common Core just doesn’t realize the errors of its ways. Example:

Now read it to me agin Tom, only colder and without any context, okay?

Now read it to me again Tom, only colder and without any purpose, okay?

Writing for a Georgetown University website, teacher Craig Thurtell takes exception to what he deems “misguided” instructions from Common Core. For instance, Common Core’s exemplar insists that “text dependent questions like ‘why did the North fight the civil War?’ divert students from text comprehension.” The instructions go on to  explain that “Answering these sorts of questions require [sic] students to go outside the text, and indeed in this particular instance asking these questions actually undermines what Lincoln is trying to say.” Really?  Nonplussed, Thurtell exclaims, “…no historian or history teacher could read the Gettysburg Address in the manner insisted upon by [the Common Core instructional]” adding that Common Core’s “admonitions against a historical approach reveal a disheartening ignorance of historical thinking.” And that’s where the honorable Mr. Thurtell goes wrong! He isn’t paranoid enough to understand what’s going on, but fortunately, dear readers, we are! You see, the creators of this assault on American school children understand history quite well—albeit in a dialectical spiral of Marxian illations—and they know, like all good brainwashers, that words lose power when subjected to dry, philological analysis. David Coleman, the author of Common Core’s “English Learning Arts” standards, specifically advocates teaching such documents “cold,” without historical context, and “without understanding of their purpose.” WOOF is not making this up!

David Coleman may have no experience teaching any level of K-12, but he's here to help!

David Coleman may have no experience teaching any level of K-12, but he’s here to help!

So, while the great books suffer death by deconstruction, the passion and flame of our nation’s history will be reduced to semantic aridity by armies of tedious grammarians. It’s really quite ingenious, Mr. Thurtell…you just have to pull the humanoid mask off these “educationists” and behold the reptiles beneath the veneer.

OMG, He's a freaking lizard!!

OMG, He’s a freaking lizard!!

NB: It is to the advantage of American parents subjected to the Common Core onslaught to obtain their children’s textbooks, and in particular their history texts. They will find that Common Core texts give dismissive shrift to the founding fathers, praise the “wonderful ideas” of Karl Marx, lambaste the Christian faith but heap praise on the accomplishments of Islam while manifesting dewy-eyed admiration for Red China, while reprehending western capitalism as cruel and immiserating. There’s nothing in Common 001358_33Core history texts explaining why the Colonies seceded from Britain, or the significance or creation of the Constitution or its relationship to the  Declaration of Independence. This is all reduced to vacuous vocabulary lessons such as “Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including analyzing how an author uses and refines the meaning of a key term over the course of a text.” Worse, when Common Core recommends outside reading, it recommends ultra-left-wing histories such as the infamously distorted tome, A History of US, by lovable Joy Hakim, the wildly popular ultra-progressive “historian” who never studied history, whose master’s degree was in education, and whose Goucher College doctorate is honorific….and not in history either!

“The law is an ass…”

arne_duncan-reform or else

Secretary of Education Duncan–basically another Chicago gunsel

In Common Core we have Federal governmental control of our children’s educations by proxy—because Common Core’s army of radical leftist educators is functioning as a “cutout” entity, serving the administration. Do you doubt us? Take a look at California (if you can bear to). Californians, during one of their rare lucid moments, proposed AB484 which has the potential of exempting the state’s kids from Common Core testing. Reaction from the Obamans was instantaneous—on September 9, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan threatened to withhold educational funding from California. He went so far as to insist that federal law requires California to administer tests. Think about that bizarre claim! The tenth amendment reserves such powers as Duncan arrogates to himself to the individual states, not some cadre of elitist social engineers in the West Wing. And then there’s the clear, specific language of the General Education Provisions Act which holds in part that:

No provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or published instructional materials by any educational institution or school system…”

No matter, though—the Obamans realized as early as 2009 that they could ignore laws with impunity. The news media work hard at never noticing such travesties. For instance, Rappin’ Preezy just “suspended” the federal law prohibiting arms sales to groups on the federal list of terrorist organizations so that he could continue arming Al Qaeda in Syria. (Take that, Putin!) This is clearly an impeachable offense, but you haven’t heard anyone mention it, have you? We mean anyone “in the mainstream.” Or to paraphrase Ben Stein in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off:  “Boehner…? Boehner….? Boehner…?”


The majority supports it, whatever it is!

A peculiar poll just released by the Harvard journal Education Next shows that 65 percent of Americans support the Common Core program and this evidently up from 63 percent in 2012. This seems especially odd since a PK/Gallup poll that came out last Wednesday maintains that two thirds of Americans have either never heard of Common Core, or don’t know what it consists of.  A closer investigation of the Harvard poll reveals that people replied enthusiastically about Common Core only after it was explained by the pollsters that Common Core was something that, “If adopted….would be used to hold the state’s schools accountable.”  Apparently nobody at Harvard’s Education Next ever read a basic textbook about unbiased population sampling…or maybe they’re postmodernists and they figure their truth is as good as any…or maybe they’re part of the Worldwide Totalitarian Socialist Conspiracy that governs us?  Nahhh.

“The chips are truly down!”

uncle_sam_playing_cards-r1cab9c4a8fc94eafb87f018fc933d555_fsvj2_8byvr_512So prepare yourselves for battle, parents of America! The enemy is already within the gates, and the brainwashing has begun in earnest. Many of you thought it was bad before now, but now the teachers’ long-standing prerogative to alter noxious curricula has been eliminated, the anti-Americanism of all too many pedagogues has been universalized, and the lock-step socialization of our children is well underway. Common Core intends to drive a wedge between you and your children, arrogate unto the schools the responsibility to impart values (postmodern relativism), to impart loyalties (to the United Nations and global progressivism) to impart political allegiance (socialism!) and to impart faith—and here Islam is inserted as an anti-Judeo/Christian religion-of-convenience suitable to the purposes of the cynical atheists who created and disseminate this toxin. This battle will not be won by RINOs, or dismayed teachers, or even by embattled bloggers at WOOF—no it can only be won by parents armed with information and aflame with righteous indignation confronting the educationists and the policy makers face to face. So check out your school system! The best source for information detailing your state’s complicity in this epic takeover is available at the 100% WOOF-approved website of Danette Clark [just click here!] Do your research, marshal your facts, find some faces and get in them!  You didn’t ask for this fight, but it’s here. You didn’t pick the place, but it’s your own neighborhood—and “The modern champions of communism have selected this as the time. And, ladies and gentlemen, the chips are down—they are truly down.”

images w



In "The Media are the Massage" forum on September 12, 2013 at 11:44 pm


Two million Americans vanish!

Now, wayyyy back in the olden days, Woofketeers, a group of motorcyclists who called themselves the “Booze Fighters” rode into the small town of Hollister California and stirred up a bit of a kerfuffle. The town was hosting a motorcycle rally, but some of the Booze Fighters (who were, and remain, aptly denominated) started some fights and caused a bit of damage. Despite the minor nature of the damage and the injuries, the “Hollister riot” became a national press sensation as headlines emphasized “pandemonium” and crazed motorcyclists commandeering a town. The press, in other words, found pay dirt in this virtual non event and hyperbolized it to such an extent that it finally became its own movie, The Wild One with Marlon Brando.  So what’s our point? Well, as Perry Mason always used to say, we intend to show relevance!

Everyone's seen "The Wild One." but did you ever see an actual Booze Fighter from that era? Yeahhh--Brando kinda got lost in translation.

Everyone’s seen “The Wild One.” but did you ever see an actual Booze Fighter from that era? Yeahhh–Brando kinda got lost in translation.

On September 11th, 2013, (yesterday as we post this) no fewer than 900,000 bikers, and perhaps as many as two million, entered the nation’s capital and jammed the streets of Washington DC. Further, they did so despite having been denied a permit, and further, they did so not only to pay homage to the victims of the assault on the World Trade Center, but also to protest the so-called Million Muslim March on DC scheduled for the same day.

The press kept countig and recounting the million Muslims--but they couldn't get much upwards of twenty.

The press kept counting and recounting the million Muslims–but they couldn’t get much upwards of twenty.

Washington DC is still practically immobilized by the legions of Harleys that swarmed into its environs on Wednesday, and the million Muslims? There were about a hundred of them, almost exclusively 9-11 Truthers and anti-Semites come to rave about the complicity of Dick Cheney, Israel and/or the infamous Halliburton weather machine in knocking down the towers and building number 7—only to be drowned out by the dirty thunder (in Hunter Thompson’s memorable phrase) of Harley Davidsons…a sound as American as Rock and Roll, the crack of a bat on a ball, or the report of a 1911 Colt. And did you even know it happened? Well, okay, you wouldn’t be reading WOOF if you weren’t extremely well informed, so you probably did know it happened, but believe us, your neighbors don’t have a clue, because so far as any of the Liberal Establishment Media were concerned, those thousands upon thousands of bikers might as well have convened on the dark side of the moon. The event was so studiously ignored by the dinosaur networks and their cable-news counterparts that people would have scratched their heads in bewilderment had they known what they weren’t allowed to know!

Nine-eleven "Truthers" get all the chicks!

Nine-eleven “Truthers” get all the chicks!

The news in America is no longer a process in which hard-bitten reporters and crusty city editors go after the story no matter where it leads and print the truth no matter whom it affronts—heck no. That’s so 1947!  The news today, especially the televised news, is propaganda spun to make Liberalism look good, and Conservatism look bad. And when events occur that contradict this theme and cannot be reconfigured to fit it, well…those events get “the spike,” which means they just didn’t happen. And that’s what happened to the motorcyclists in Washington DC. They just never happened on the news, because there was no way to give Obama credit for them, or make them look like they were advocating socialism. Are you kidding? Those bikers stood for unmitigated freedom, the Wild West, manifest destiny, the American Dream, and about a dozen other concepts that curdle the blood of the establishment drones that play reporters on television. So they got flushed down the memory hole even while they were clogging the avenues of the nation’s capital, gunning their 74’s and waving Old Glory! So, how did the media news get so treasonably propagandistic? How did the newshounds who turned Hollister into a national phenomenon devolute over a few decades into a credible pantomime of the three blind mice? Well, woofers, that’s what these WHITE PAPER reports are all about!

It was a bit harder to count the influx of patriotic, flag waving bikers as they swamped DC, but that didn't matter much because they were never really there to begin with!

It was a bit harder to count the influx of patriotic, flag waving bikers as they swamped DC, but that didn’t matter much because they were never really there to begin with!

Previously on “Why All the News is Bad”….

In our last self-importantly titled WOOF WHITE PAPER REPORT [view it here] we left you with the end of Dave Garroway’s career on the TODAY program, after explaining that Mr. Garroway’s departure together with the somewhat earlier exit (resulting from unspecified personal concerns) of J. Fred Muggs, the show’s chimpanzee co-host, signaled an end to the golden era of morning television news programming. TODAY was plunged into a dark age of dopiness that began with John Chancellor taking over the program—but sitting woodenly and officiously where Uncle Dave was the epitome of cool-medium sangfroid. Hugh Downs and Barbara Walters followed, and so on down a long chain of entropic embarrassments the worst of whom were undoubtedly the addle pate Jane Pauli and the perpetually tongue-tied Tom Brokaw—but we digress. Readers may rightly wonder that so iconic a figure as Garroway was not more broadly emulated by those who followed in his footsteps, and there are two reasons for this, really. First, Garroway was a natural, and TV producers do not typically look for naturals, they simply happen upon them, so that once such talent departs they are left to hunt for imitators who pretend to be natural—and that’s how you get Jane Pauley—but anyway….the second reason is the more pertinent:  By the time Garroway took his leave at the terminus of the Eisenhower era, the up-and-coming TV newsies had a new hero—one of mythological proportions. Somebody seriously important, seriously grave—seriously serious!

Many TODAY Viewers felt that he transition from Muggs to Brokaw bespoke a certain devolutionary trend--but studies indicate their vocabularies were virtually identical!

Many TODAY Viewers felt that the transition from Muggs to Brokaw bespoke a clear devolutionary trend–but studies indicate their vocabularies were nearly identical!

Even as the ‘50s shambled somnolently, unsuspectingly, toward the ‘60s, a subtle tectonic shift began to slide the American media leftwards, and this movement could never have rallied to genial Uncle Dave and his simian co-anchor—where’s the glory in that? No, while the crew at TODAY (and their imitators at the other two networks) proceeded to market a kind of cope-and-fluff badinage that mimicked only the least substantive aspect of the legendary Garroway, the rest of the go-getters in televised news fixated on that truest of all liberal emotions: Sanctimony. Sanctimony has taken the liberal media everywhere they’ve been—but what were its origins? Where was the journalistic standard for sanctimony established, and by whom? Our gentle readers will not be surprised to learn that WOOF has the answers!

Confronting the great evil… 

Classic Murrow--stand back so's you're not scorched by the righteousness!

Classic Murrow–stand back so’s you’re not scorched by the righteousness!

It was not Garroway whom the young Turks of broadcasting wished to emulate, no indeed. It was Edward R. Murrow. And what does everybody know about Edward R. Murrow? Why he and the CBS news department single-handedly destroyed the most evil man who ever lived—Joseph Raymond McCarthy, right? And along with Joe McCarthy (whom biographer Thomas Reeves went so far as to call “our King John”), Murrow is said to have wiped out that horrendous “ism” that McCarthy engendered, although, sad to say, it rears its noxious head occasionally—like whenever anybody has the poor judgment to notice a communist. It is impossible to go five years without the media complex finding some way to resurrect this legend and re-teach it to the masses, so that even though most of today’s citizens cannot recall Joe McCarthy, he looms in our national psyche like a political version of Keyser Soze from the film The Usual Suspects. To paraphrase Kevin Spacey from that film, McCarthy is now “a spook story CBS tells us kids at night.”

Yikes! Peter Boyle portrayed McCarthy as a cross between Young Frankenstein and Godzilla! Definitely NOT an evening's best bet!

Yikes! Peter Boyle portrayed McCarthy as a cross between Young Frankenstein and Godzilla…definitely NOT an evening’s best bet!

Films like Goodnight and Good Luck add to the mythic significance (while misleading the audience with near hysteric alacrity about, among other things, the Annie Lee Moss case), as do made-for-TV “docudramas” like NBC’s ridiculously fact-challenged Tail Gunner Joe. But what Murrow really deserves credit for is pioneering “bag job” journalism, in which a story is twisted in an overtly propagandistic way to make its subject look especially horrible. Murrow’s carefully and maliciously edited slam job was so egregiously slanted in order to portray McCarthy as demonic that even Joe’s harshest critic, John Cogley of Commonweal, rose to the Senator’s defense, pointing out that ”A totally different selection of film would turn Senator McCarthy into a man on a shining white steed.” Thus it was Cogley who first warned of the amazing power of televised coverage to function as an engine of malignant distortion in the hands of unprincipled broadcasters. Contrary to CBS legend, the blast from Murrow did not end Joe’s career, and his poll numbers remained high—but the “See It Now” broadcast paved the way for his destruction by the Left, with a decisive assist from the Eisenhower administration. (Do you doubt this readers? Grab a copy of William Bragg Ewald’s Who Killed Joe McCarthy for edification!)

The Army/McCarthy hearings, orchestrated by Eisenhower, were more damaging to Joe's status than Murrow's program. Here, Joe enters the hearings and Army attorney Joseph Welch is smitten with one of those anti-anti-communist migraines.

The televised Army/McCarthy hearings, orchestrated by Eisenhower, were more damaging to Joe’s status than Murrow’s program. Here, Joe enters the hearings and Army attorney Joseph Welch is smitten with one of those pesky anti-anti-communist migraines.

But Murrow’s vainglorious posturing (and the equally preposterous pretense that he was virtually taking his life in his hands by broadcasting “truth to power” on his little ol’ national network news show) inscribed the template for the journalism of destruction that became a loaded weapon in the hands of the leftwing media establishment. How do you manage to feel and appear brave?  Take on seethingly demonic powers like McCarthy, or Goldwater, Reagan, or “W” Bush—guys who, in fact, can be criticized with near impunity and to wild applause from the Left—but pretend you are on a virtual suicide mission in so doing while your colleagues play along and ooh and ahhh at your boldness! And how do you manifest gravitas? Just arrange to ooze pietistic indignation while you’re at it—like Mike Wallace or Dan Rather or Keith Olbermann (who took the formula to psychedelic extremes).  Somewhere, through billowing effusions of cigarette smoke, Edward R. Murrow will be smiling–wanly, of course– but smiling nonetheless.

The Camelot Illusion

Chet Huntley and David Brinkley led the news ratings in the Kennedy epoch.

Chet Huntley and David Brinkley led the news ratings in the Kennedy epoch.

Dave Garroway left the Today program in 1961, and John Kennedy became president. The same media machine that covered up FDR’s polio and would one day cover up Obama’s treasonable misconduct and embarrassingly un-American past, went to work pretending not to notice JFK’s philandering. But even then there was no hint of the left-slanted news coverage we experience today. Why, Huntley and Brinkley on NBC were famously Republican and Democrat, and led the ratings. Walter Cronkite at CBS was yet to identify himself as a full-blown progressive. He was, instead, on his way to being voted “most trusted man in America.”  And at ABC Ron Cochran was inoffensive enough to be almost totally forgotten. Sorry Ron.

Cronkite stifled a tear as he reported JFK's death--and a nation in shock believed they saw their favorite uncle in his visage.

Cronkite stifled a tear as he reported JFK’s death–and a nation in shock believed they saw their favorite uncle in his visage.

When shots rang out in Dealey Plaza on a sunny afternoon in Dallas, and the country was plunged without notice into the lumbering socialist experiment that was Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society,” Cronkite was the man to whom the nation turned, and with whom the nation communed during its unprecedented trauma. In times of unbridled distress it is tempting to grasp at straws—and no less so at straw men. We idealized and apotheosized Cronkite—the avuncular national media figure who emerged from that ordeal “the most trusted man in America” and made egregious use of that trust on many counts before he shambled off finally to rave radically from the cultural sidelines.

Morley and Dan and Vietnam!

Morely on the trail of those pyromaniac Leathernecks!

Morely on the trail of those pyromaniac Leathernecks!

Few Americans would believe that Vietnam coverage began with a giddy Walter Cronkite in a helmet and visor, riding backseat on a fighter-bomber mission, yelling “Yahoo! We really got ‘em!” as the two-seater plane’s payload shattered the jungle. Always unintelligent before he was anything else, Cronkite had not yet bought into
(or been much identified with) what would become his legendary iconicism. (But at least he had guts.) Morley Safer of CBS may have kicked Vietnam coverage leftwards with his famous Zippo lighter story in 1965. Morely attached himself to a platoon of Marines who were entering a VC-sympathetic village from which Americans had been receiving hostile fire for days. On this occasion, as ordered, the Marines evacuated the villagers from their huts and set fire to the structures to eliminate weapons caches, tunnel entrances, and covert firing positions. They also did it to firmly impress upon the villagers that enough was enough. Morley had his camera man record the burning of the huts whilst he sermonized liberally, shall we say, about the brutality of it all—and to Americans eating Swanson TV dinners while watching the evening news that August 5th it might as well have been the Japanese rape of Nanking!

Dan the Man in Vietnam! Here, Rather interviews a 175 mm artillery piece.

Dan the Man in Vietnam! Here, Rather interviews a 175 mm artillery piece.

Many Americans believed the military was what they saw on Gomer Pyle, USMC, or at its most brutal, perhaps, like ABC’s Combat! The “Zippo jobs” appeared shocking and brutal. Vic Morrow would never do anything like that on Combat! And Safer made sure to get footage of an old Vietnamese man weeping as his hovel was torched, making equally sure to omit any mention of the fact the village was thoroughly infiltrated by and sympathetic to the Communist guerrillas, or that Marines had been killed in the village, or that vast numbers of booby traps, trenches, tunnels, and munitions stores were discovered in and around the village. The Marines’ after-action report states that 50 structures were reduced—Safer gave the figure as 150. He carefully created an impression of sadistic American soldiers wantonly depriving peaceful villagers of their homes for the hell of it—making no mention of the fact that burning places of suspected enemy refuge was as old as war itself, and that he happened to be traveling with the only military force in history that evacuated the premises first! Back in Washington DC, President Johnson flipped out, but was sandbagged by the inchoately obdurate CBS news bureaucracy. Furious, LBJ ordered the FBI to investigate Safer. “He’s a communist!” Johnson thundered at his staff. But the FBI report stated that Safer was not a communist, he was a Canadian. “Well,”  Johnson spat, “I knew he couldn’t be an American!” (Even LBJ had his moments!)

Another boy from Vietnam who bears mention is that redoubtable newshound, Dan Rather, who also reported abusively from the front, such as it was, clad in sporty bush jackets or shirts with epaulets. Rather never objects, by the way, to being described as or posturing as a former Marine, but that’s balderdash. He flunked boot camp and dropped out. Perhaps this drove him to harangue the guys who didn’t drop out, as he did habitually and in gravely censorious tones (think Ed Murrow!) during his “tour of duty” back in 1966.

The wall within…

cover-Time-19800225-46900But Rather’s greatest moment, his real chef d’oeuvre came long after he’d stepped off the plane home from Southeast Asia, and long before he went into a stoic trance, nightly repeating his certitude that his odiferously-fake George W. Bush memoranda were “unimpeachable.” Yes, Rather’s work on the infamous broadcast, The Wall Within not only typified, but probably epitomized his career as a serially slanderous Pecksniff.  Indeed, the most notable aspect of Wall Within is not that it was a widely and wildly praised documentary that won many plaudits for Rather and his supposedly exhaustive research and gritty reportage—no, the more interesting datum is that  it was just a template, really, to which Rather repaired repeatedly throughout his career.

No matter how depraved or crazed you were, you had a friend in Dan!

No matter how depraved or crazed you were, you had a friend in Dan!

Few, mercifully, now recall CBS Reports: The Wall Within, which aired on June 2, 1988. But WOOF remembers it. Viewers were treated to far greater tales of horror than Zippo lighters could ever provide (eat your heart out Morley Safer)—they were treated to the stark, violently psychotic remembrances of Vietnam vets who had waded through a nightmarish hellscape in Southeast Asia, only to return crazed and dissociated–haunted men, unappreciated by their government, and forgotten by everyone else—everyone but Dan Rather, of course, who was willing to commune with them in studiedly hushed tones, allowing them finally to seek peace in the catharsis of televised confession.

Former Navy SEAL Steve Southards spoke dramatically of his time in “Nam,” spent on secret missions killing untold hundreds of Vietnamese civilians and then tricking up the scenes of slaughter to give the impression that the VC had perpetrated the atrocities. Dan, who had obviously been studying Mike Wallace’s patented “You mean to tell me—“ kinesics, tried his own adaptation, edging closer to Southard and rasping, “You’re telling me that you went into the villages and killed, burned parts of the villages, and then made it appear that the other side had done this?” (This is where Wallace would bug out his eyes and arch his brows, but Rather’s face doesn’t work that way). Anyhow, “Yes!” Steve Southard nodded vigorously, adding in a menacing rasp, “…and I was good at what I did!”

And he "was good at it!"

“And I was good at what I did!”

Rather’s next case was George Grule, who spent his war on the aircraft carrier Ticonderoga, cruising the waters off of Vietnam “on a secret mission” and who described himself as suicidal as a direct result of watching his best friend walk deliberately into the spinning propeller of an AD-6 Skyraider which (of course) pulverized him, spraying his innards all over the helplessly watching Grule. As a result, Grule (like Southard) was unable to return to civil society and lived the life of a mentally tortured recluse. Even aboard ship, the horror of Vietnam took its cruel toll!

Skinned alive!

images pitt 2

We couldn’t find a pic of Bradley, but Brad Pitt’s better looking, and you get the idea, right?

But the show stopper—Dan’s piece de resistance, was the story told by Terry Bradley who spoke at length and in lurid detail about skinning Vietnamese civilians and suspected guerillas, alive. Terry told a stoically composed but compassionately nodding Rather that he had once skinned 50 screaming Vietnamese men, women, and boys, and stacked their bodies like cord wood, all in the space of an hour.  (One thinks here—or at least we do—of Mark Twain’s hilarious essay on “Cooper Indians” wherein the ridiculousness of behaviors ascribed to Indians portrayed in James Fennimore Cooper’s novels is made manifest by careful consideration) “You stack up every way a body could be mangled—an arm, a tit, an eyeball…imagine us over there for a year doing this intensely!” Yes, quite! A lesser man might have been at a loss for words, but not Dan. He looked squarely at Bradley and gently drawled, “you’ve got to be angry about it!”

But nobody was as angry as the Veterans Administration and researcher B. G. Burkett, himself a Vietnam vet. Neither the VA nor Burkett had to do very much digging to realize that Rather’s entire report was less “Wall Within” and more wall-to-wall bull scat. Southards, for instance, the SEAL who mass murdered civilians for the CIA, never actually served in combat. He turned out to have been an equipment repairman stationed safely in the secure rear. Poor George Gruel whose best buddy snapped during a secret mission and hugged a spinning airplane propeller, was never on a secret mission. While a crewman did in fact walk into a propeller (accidentally) during Gruel’s time aboard the Ticonderoga. Gruel had not been on deck to witness the incident, which in any case  occurred off the coast of California, where the carrier did most of her cruising when Gruel was aboard …not during a “secret mission” to Vietnam.

The good ship Ticonderoga--she recovered the crew of Apollo 16 after splashdown, but secret missions off the coast of Vietnam? C'mon, Dan!

The good ship Ticonderoga–she recovered the crew of Apollo 16 after splashdown, but secret missions off the coast of Vietnam? C’mon, Dan!

And what about Terry Bradley, so talented that he could skin 50 wiggling, screaming human beings in 60 minutes and live to tell Dan Rather about it? Well, Terry never saw combat either. In fact, he hardly ever saw the depot where he was supposed to be an ammo handler for the 25th Infantry division because he spent a year of his hitch in the stockade for repeatedly going AWOL. As Anne Morse of the National Review noted years ago, after reporting on Rather’s little exercise in carnographic fiction—all of these vets were easily checkable through a variety of sources. The special operations community is tiny in contrast to the rest of the military establishment, and it was tinier still in Vietnam. Checking to see who had endured basic underwater demolition/SEAL training in a class with Southard would have been simple—and the answer would have been: nobody!

A bright and shining liar…

CBS News President Howard Stringer--picture does not show his pants, which were on fire.

CBS News President Howard Stringer–picture does not show his pants, which were on fire at the time.

Why did Rather simply ignore his responsibility to get his story straight before broadcasting it into millions of American homes? It is too simple to shrug and tell ourselves, well, he’s stupid. That’s only half the story—the other half is, he’s duplicitous. For decades he disguised duplicity as a dutiful, noble thing. He made of it, to borrow John Paul Vann’s unforgettable phrase, a bright and shining lie. But he got caught. It didn’t matter to Dan or his network when The Wall Within was exposed– not at all. Because nobody would report that Rather had been caught—but by 2004 the rules had changed, and Dan hadn’t noticed—that’s the stupid part! Back in the 80’s, Rather refused to comment after his falsifications were exposed, and he had nothing to say either about the scary statistics he’d invented for rates of suicide, homelessness, and mental disturbances among returning Vietnam vets, all bogus. But CBS president Howard Stringer wasn’t struck dumb. When asked why the entire presentation, stem to stern, had been wholesale malarkey, he shrugged and handed out a response that could only have sufficed in a three-network era of monopolized newscasting. “Your criticisms,” he harrumphed, “were not shared by a vast majority of our viewers. CBS News and its affiliates received acclaim from most quarters . . . In sum, this was a broadcast of which we at CBS News and I personally am [sic] proud. There are no apologies to make.” Right! And you know, every word of that statement is true, until you get to the no-apologies-to-make part. Liberals always applaud and reward themselves for their flapdoodle. It’s tradition. And by the time the war in Vietnam concluded, it was solidly entrenched.

How Uncle Walter Ended the War!

Cronkite back in Vietnam, no longer yelling yahoo.

Cronkite back in Vietnam, no longer yelling yahoo.

If Nobel Prizes went to the deserving, Walter Cronkite would have won one for ending the war in Vietnam. Well, he actually threw it, more than ended it, but as his personal relations with LBJ soured for various reasons, Cronkite became ardently critical of U.S. involvement. Now widely hailed as the “most trusted man in America,” Uncle Walter had his way at CBS. Night after night he busied himself shaping the news to the Left, spiking stories that contradicted his favorite talking points, and advancing what by now was a full-blown left wing agenda. Cronkite, more than any other individual in this axial period of media coverage set the standard for what would become the Liberal newscast—carefully crafted propaganda sold to the viewer with an air of avuncular sincerity. He was infinitely better at it than today’s vapid assemblage, and the Tet Offensive in 1968 made his day.

Tet resulted in the destruction of the Viet Cong as a viable force, but it looked bad on film, so the News decided it was Waterloo.

Tet resulted in the destruction of the Viet Cong as a viable force, but it looked bad on film, so the News decided it was Waterloo.

The Tet Offensive produced shock and awe in South Vietnam, combining surprise with the concerted effort to bring violent warfare to the most secure and pacified areas of the country. During an agreed upon cease fire in honor of the Tet New Year, (because it only seemed the civil thing to do, after all) the communists hurled 80,000 troops into 100 towns and cities. The surprise was total, and the impression was that America, despite all its claims, had no control of the situation even in its own rear areas. The offensive was the largest military operation conducted by either side up to that point in the war, partially because Robert McNamara’s moronic policies precluded any American offensives against the North. Even so, Tet was a mammoth failure for the communists. Hanoi underestimated the mobility of the American and South Vietnamese response. The general uprising the North had expected to inspire in the South did not materialize. The poor tactics inherent in attacking so many objectives thinly rather than a few objectives in force led to the communist forces being stopped, isolated, and destroyed piecemeal. Communist General Tran Van Tra admitted, “We did not correctly evaluate the specific balance of forces between ourselves and the enemy, did not fully realize that the enemy still had considerable capabilities, and that our capabilities were limited, and set requirements that were beyond our actual strength.” Oops. Sorry about that, Tran—in fact, the immediate result of Tet was the complete destruction of the Viet Cong infrastructure, but the Reds soon became aware of a different sort of victory—one they admitted later they had never predicted or expected.

imageswcEnter Walter Cronkite, who knew about as much about the science of war as he did about Sumerian pronounal declensions. Walter looked America right in the eyeballs, shook his jowls poignantly, and told us, “we are mired in a stalemate that could only be ended by negotiation, not victory.” Shortly thereafter support for the war dropped from 74 to 54 percent, and continued to erode. The communists in Saigon had been handed a miracle—the total destruction of 80,000 Viet Cong was transformed into an American defeat in Vietnam by trusty Uncle Walter, who later huffed that his newscasts had ended the war. They didn’t, of course, any more than Murrow’s kvetching ended McCarthyism, but they may well have shaped the course that led to our discomfiture and the wanton slaughter of 75,000 of our former allies in the South.

Turns out LBJ bugged Goldwater in more ways than one!

Turns out LBJ bugged Goldwater in more ways than one!

Richard Nixon, for all his flaws, nearly won a just and lasting peace in Southeast Asia by battering the North with B-52 strikes (attacking the enemy’s homeland? Imagine!) and briefly invading Cambodia to wipe out communist supplies and reserve forces. His truce with the North might have held had he himself not been victimized by American journalists bent on removing him from office, and forced to resign. The great sin of Watergate, the offense for which Nixon was savaged by Washington Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein, was that the president’s men, led by the G. Gordon Liddy, had bungled a break-in at the Watergate hotel intended to “bug” the Democratic headquarters during an election year—just as LBJ had bugged Goldwater’s headquarters in 1964. Much, in fact–although nobody discusses this– the way Walter Cronkite bugged the GOP convention in 1952—WOOF is not making this up!

Nor shall we make up an iota of the next thrilling episode of WOOF’s hard-hitting critique of electronic journalism in the age of media-ocrity, Woofketeers! Every word will be true, (or we couldn’t say it on the Internet!) Don’t miss installment three, “What’s the Frequency, Kenneth?” coming soon!

images she-ra


SYRIAN SITZKRIEG ENTERS SECOND MONTH–WOOF wearies of subject but soldiers on!

In "Unfinished Waffles" forum on September 7, 2013 at 5:07 pm


         “If you set out to take Vienna—take Vienna!”–Napoleon Bonaparte

And now a quick assessment of the unfolding Middle Eastern ludicrosity: Let’s see—President Obama is flying home from being repeatedly humiliated by Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in Russia, ready to face the possibility of being handed the closest thing to a vote of no-confidence the House of Representatives can bestow on a sitting president, unless the administration prevails in that legislative body and is granted permission to do what it already has the authority under the War Powers Resolution to do anyway, but apparently doesn’t really want to do any more, which is punish the regime of Bashar Assad, who may or may not be guilty of actually doing what a considerable number of intelligence services now believe his opponents really did, so that we can wage war on behalf of our sworn enemy, Al Qaeda, because some of their friends may or may not be as bad as they are. In an effort to rally support for a military strike against Assad, President Obama has recently taken to assuring us that Assad will not be a target, that his nerve gas stores will not be a target, and that whatever we do it won’t be all that much. Meanwhile, our potential adversaries in the vicinity have been offered generous amounts of time in which to contemplate and arrange all sorts of retaliatory strikes, the main target of which will almost certainly be Israel, with whom we remain titularly allied despite Beloved Leader’s obvious disdain for the Jewish State.

Photo of officer and men aboard the Russian guided missile cruiser Varyag shows Russia's continued reliance on service men aboard their warships--a practice John McCain declared obsolete!

Photo of officer and men aboard the Russian guided missile cruiser Varyag shows Russia’s continued reliance on servicemen aboard their warships–a practice John McCain believes obsolete!

Unless of course Russia does something nasty, and apparently we consider that unthinkable and have not, therefore, thought about it. Meanwhile, to add a final note of clarity, John McCain has just gone on record at a town hall meeting to the effect that the entire operation can be carried off handily and “not put a single American life in danger.”  So, no bombers, no fighters, and the robotization (seemingly) of the entire Sixth Fleet?! All WOOF can say is: wow!  Russia, by comparison, is reportedly beefing up its fleet in the Mediterranean—and we bet they’re still using old fashioned human sailors on their ships—how 1991 is that?

We’ll always have Paris!

we'll always have ParisQuick, what is the Paris of the Middle East? Don’t know? Well, don’t fault yourselves, gentle readers, because there isn’t one! However, once upon a time there was, and it was Beirut. Yes, Beirut Lebanon. Seriously. In the post-World-War-Two era, Beirut blossomed as a magnificent intellectual and architectural beacon to the world’s citizenry—a highly preferred tourist destination and a booming commercial metropolis aglow with all the gleam and gaud of the Persian Gulf’s runaway oil market. Moreover, it remained a shining monument to peaceful, prosperous internationalism right through the Kennedy era, the Johnson era, and even Nixon’s tenure. And then, in 1975, following the American humiliation in Vietnam and as if in recognition of the phlegmatic American Congress that sold South Vietnam down the drain despite the pleas of a powerless Jerry Ford, a civil war exploded all over Lebanon, pitting the Muslims against the Christians, and the veritable oasis of Beirut’s beautiful downtown area was reduced to rubble.  None of this was helped by Syria rolling in and throwing its military behind the Muslims. Despite an eventual Israeli incursion aimed at restoring order and blunting the Syrian attacks on Christians, Syria retained a dark influence in Lebanese politics together with a force of 14,000 troops in country. Perhaps readers recall the “Cedar Revolution” and a million protesters gathered to demonstrate against the Syrian presence, following which Syrian forces withdrew. Happy Days, right? So why, you must be asking by now, is WOOF making you think about all this when the real problems are now in Syria?

See Lebanon and die?

See Lebanon and die?

Well…see…despite the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, a little problem by the name of Hezbollah was left behind. Okay, we lied about the ‘little’ part—Hezbollah is in fact a fast-metastasizing aberration in the form of Shi’a Islamic terrorists who despise America, hate Israel, and seek Jihad for Jihad’s sake every day in every way! And they are, naturally, displeased to learn that the United States may be preparing to shoot cruise missiles at their old partner in crime, Bashar Assad, the Syrian dictator  with the teensy-weensy head and the big fat neckties (and the inexplicably hot wife).  But we digress. The main point is this, Woofketeers:


Hezbollah recruits swearing to extirpate Israel (and then us), demonstrate their nostalgically retro salute!

The State Department on Friday ordered nonessential U.S. diplomats to leave Lebanon, citing unspecified security concerns surrounding the Obama administration’s well-known and agonizingly prolonged plans to launch American military strikes in reprisal for Syria’s alleged use of chemical weapons on August 21st. “The potential in Lebanon for a spontaneous upsurge in violence remains,” the Department said, adding that: “Lebanese government authorities are not able to guarantee protection for citizens or visitors…  should violence erupt suddenly. Access to borders, airports, roads, and seaports can be interrupted with little or no warning.” Woahhh…first we messed up Egypt beyond all recognition, then we destabilized Libya by eradicating any semblance of national order, next we began threatening airstrikes against Syria in support of Al Qaeda, and now Lebanon is blowing up in our faces? Yes, because Hezbollah is part of the Russian-Iranian-Syrian alliance and enjoys its Lebanese monopoly on terror. Hezbollah and Al Qaeda are nearly identical from a topographical point of view, just as Al Capone’s mob and Bugs Moran’s mob were overtly similar in intent and comportment. But when Bugs decided to muscle in on Al’s territory, the Saint Valentine’s Day massacre resulted, right? Similarly, supporting Bashar Assad in his battle with the “moderate rebel elements” (aka Al Qaeda) makes sense for the Lebanese jihadists despite the manifest consanguinity of the two factions.

Turkey flambé?

Think it can’t get worse than this? Six hours ago (as we tap this out in the candlelit maw of the WOOF cave) the U.S. Department of State warned “U.S. citizens traveling to or living in Turkey” (yes! Turkey!) that, “the U.S. Consulate General in Adana has been authorized to draw down its non-emergency staff and family members because of threats against U.S. government facilities and personnel.” The Department of State went on to warn Americans in no uncertain terms against “non-essential travel to Turkey.”  And how on earth did we get to the point of a Turkish upheaval? By conducting a pro-Jihadist foreign policy from the moment Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama put their noodles together, that’s how.

Stability and peace getting on your nerves? Just add Hillary!

Stability and peace getting on your nerves? Just add Hillary!

And as regular readers are aware, WOOF has far too much respect for both above-named individuals to assume, as most of their critics seem to, that simple ineptitude and/or imperishable ignorance account for the boundless ruination their policies generated and continue to generate. On the contrary, WOOF persists in its firm belief that every inch of this has been intentionally engineered, and that the transformation of the Middle East into a raging Caliphate united in odium and the rabid abhorrence of Israel was a confidential goal of the Obama presidency even before it reified on that bleak 2nd November in the year of Our Lord, 2008. And just when you thought Iraq, although still a red hot combat zone, was off your worry list because the Liberal Establishment Media no longer cover it (Our Dear Leader having declared it over with), it turns out those gosh darned Iranians are sending undercover units of their Revolutionary Guard’s suicidally adamant  Quds Force to attack the American embassy in Baghdad. And word has it that specially trained Syrian forces allied with the above mentioned crazies of Hezbollah are poised to assault the embassy in Beirut.  And of course, Henry the horse dances the waltz! (Sorry, we threw that in).

Why would the Bamster want to bomb Bashar?

This, youngsters, is Thomas Magnum (Tom Selleck) but WOOF still doesn't know where he kept that .45!

This, youngsters, is Thomas Magnum (Tom Selleck) but WOOF still doesn’t know where he kept that .45!

Okay, so to paraphrase Thomas Magnum, we know what you’re thinking! If the whole commie plot was to toss the entire Middle east into unprecedented turmoil, why are we preparing to bomb Bashar Assad for a silly miscreancy like using a little nerve gas on about fourteen hundred of his citizens when the civil unrest in Syria has already claimed over one-hundred thousand lives? How does this sudden yen to play “World Police” fit into the Obama regime’s scheme to induce chaos across the Middle East conducing toward a pan-Islamic Caliphate? Well, it doesn’t!  But it was never supposed to get out of hand like this—it was planned as a nice, simple, military diversion—you know, some jet something-or-others would drop some of those “jdam” thingamajigs, and maybe some of those exploding drone-type whatchacallit cruise missiles could go off and there could be some of that cool camera footage like in that Iraq war back when people watched CNN, and we could watch those airplanes—you know—the kind that take off from those big boats? And maybe some submarines could shoot some stuff or something—and then Our Dear Leader’s popularity would go sky high in the poles, and nobody—and here’s the main idea, so don’t miss it: Nobody would be talking about the snowballing collection of Obamagate scandals. So what scandals are we referring to? Well, in no necessary order:

The use of the IRS to electioneer for Obama by clamping down on Tea Party organizations prior to the 2012 elections; the use of the Justice Department to ObamaShhhrun guns to Mexican Drug Lords in hopes they’d shoot some Americans (as indeed they did) enabling the Administration to  repeal the 2nd amendment (which didn’t work out because it got caught smuggling the guns); the further use of the Justice Department’s outreach wing to publicly rabble rouse for the arrest and conviction of George Zimmerman despite the absence of incriminating evidence; the refusal of the Justice Department to do anything whatsoever about members of the New Black Panther Party harassing voters with billy clubs in 2008; the further use of the Justice Department to intimidate journalists by, for instance, declaring FOX News’s James Rosen a criminal; the manifest perjury committed by Attorney General holderEric Holder when he told Congress he had no idea that such depredations had been visited upon poor Rosen just before his, Holder’s, signature was found on the affidavit declaring Rosen a criminal; the additional perjury of William Holder assuring Congress he had just learned about the “Fast and Furious” gun running travesty when he was clearly directing it from the beginning; the GSA ringing up a bill for 823,000 dollars for a “conference” in Las Vegas which included a number of psychic mind readers and at least one professional clown; waging war on the government of Libya without congressional approval and for a far greater length of time than permitted by the War Powers Resolution; Solyndra; Verizon; ignoring orders from a Federal court to lift the ban on drilling for oil off our coastline; unilaterally deciding not to enforce federal law by refusing to report or deal with reports of illegal aliens; unilaterally deciding not to allow the law of the land (i.e., Obamacare) to occur until it is convenient to the Democrat party’s fortunes; overseeing the Justice Department’s illegal seizure of innumerable AP  reporters’ phone records; overseeing the NSA’s intrusion into the private communications of practically every American citizen; and of course the effort to free the “Blind Sheikh” by colluding with the Muslim Brotherhood to kidnap the American Ambassador to Libya so that the Sheikh (who master-minded the original World Trade Center bombing), could be sent back to Egypt in a seemingly humanitarian prisoner exchange. This last effort, gone badly awry, led to the additional high crimes of allowing the Ambassador to Libya to be seized, serially raped, and murdered following an eight-hour battle in Benghazi while all the while issuing repeated stand-down orders through Valerie Jarrett (who had no constitutional right to issue such orders), thus dooming two State Department officials and two former SEALs to violent deaths, and then lying for two full weeks about the nature of the attack in Benghazi while blaming it on a ridiculously bad movie that nobody in Libya had ever seen or heard of until they learned about it from Susan Rice. (Whew!) And this, by the way, is a very short, highly abridged list!

Blind Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman: a man so evil, he routinely impersonates Santa Claus!

Blind Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman: a man so evil, he routinely impersonates Santa Claus!

But just as the tidy plan to confect a seemingly humanitarian prisoner exchange (thereby retrieving Ambassador Stevens and sending the Blind Sheikh back to his adoring fan base in Egypt) went terribly wrong when those darned Ansar al-Sharia gunsels muffed the job and (oops!) killed the unsuspecting Ambassador, so the planned martial extravaganza–meant to relieve our bovine brains of all this preoccupation with administration scandal–went terribly wrong.  WOOF knows that the plans for a quick, photogenic shoot-em-up emanated from the Susan Rice, Chuck Hagel, John Kerry quadrant—that portion of the president’s brain trust (if one may apply such a term without appearing unduly knavish) that thinks in terms of party politics and domestic exigencies. WOOF knows that up until August 30th, this cohort was dominant and Rappin’ Preezy was convinced that a bit of faux martial pyrotechnics would boost his sagging poll numbers and give his lap-poodle media the desperately-sought opportunity to distract themselves and their viewers from any burgeoning discussions of the gargantuan accretion of scandal overshadowing his Oval Office—particularly any further inquiries into the Benghazi catastrophe. Benghazi defied any explanation, after all, other than the truth; and the truth amounted to treason—so a few bombs and rockets, it was reasoned, a bit of wagging the dog a la Clinton, should put the whole circus back on the road and paper over the irregularities of the past.


hamletBut the presidential determination to strike and to strike swiftly and colorfully in whatever ways General Dempsey and the rest of the president’s uniformed acolytes recommended soon ran afoul of Valerie Jarrett and the radically anti-American wing of the Obama advisory klatch. This wing is respondently phobic of America’s military in any capacity other than observable decline, and in complete solidarity with Islamic terror wherever encountered, and no matter by whom advanced. Remember, it was Valerie Jarrett who repeatedly (at least thrice, it appears) dissuaded Obama from the bin Laden raid, until even his most sycophantic generals and admirals staged a mini coup and insisted that the raid proceed or the president’s serial refusals be leaked. Similarly, it was Jarrett, an Iranian-born communist agent of influence, who persuaded Obama, as August waned, that military action against the Assad government would be unconscionable. Thus, on the 31st of August, WOOF knows the Bamster called a cabinet meeting and announced that he was now lost in incertitude about the attack he’d so adamantly demanded earlier. He told his astonished advisors that he had decided to dump the whole matter on Congress. The decision would thus be theirs to make, and the president could vote “present,” as is his wont.

The quavering red line…

Colonel Travis really knew how to draw a line in the sand--Obama should have checked out his panache! (But then again, those guys all got killed!)

Colonel Travis really knew how to draw a line in the sand–Obama should have emulated his panache! (But then again, those guys all got killed!)

Problem: The president  made it very clear on an occasion in 2012 that the Syrians would cross a “red line” if they used nerve gas.  “A red line for us,” Obama puffed, “is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized, that would change my calculus.” Revising this sadly-typical moment of ill-considered fustian was old hat for Dear Leader, who simply informed the press this week that he had never said any such thing—that in fact the red line comment emanated from “the international community.” And that inelegant dodge might have worked six months earlier, when Obama’s adoring media would simply have repeated the revised drivel as gospel, but at this rocky juncture even ABC and CBS played the old tape juxtaposed to the new tape, and the cognitive dissonance seemed painful to them.

Math challenged? The redoubtable Jen Psaki rope-a-doping for Rappin' Preezy.

Math challenged? The redoubtable Jen Psaki rope-a-doping for Rappin’ Preezy.

Next came poor, long suffering State Department fixit girl, Jen Psaki, who wisely insisted she would not “have a debate or conversation about the red line in Syria” but assured all and sundry that 9 countries had agreed to support the united States in an attack on Syria. Within a few breaths this number became 10 countries. Not content with dithering over whether adding America to the originally stated 9 countries provided the figure of ten countries, Ms. Psaki soon erupted with, “I should say…30 countries” but as was the case with a far greater American protagonist many decades earlier, she seemed to have left her list in her other suit. When asked to name actual countries she returned to the figure 9, rattling off Australia, Albania, Kosovo, Canada, Denmark, France, Poland, Romania, and Turkey.  Heaven knows our boys will fly into battle more confidently knowing the Air Forces of Kosovo and Albania have their backs! But at that point some pesky reporter informed Psaki that Secretary of State Kerry had said 34 countries. Psaki countered by upping the ante to 50 countries, but these turned out to be countries that agreed Assad had used gas on his own people. This leaves, by WOOF’s calculation, 146 countries on the planet which, by the simple fact of their exclusion from Psaki’s list of 50, must not agree that Assad used gas on his own people.

Putin, ascendant!

One lump of plutonium, or two? It's a sad day when Vlad Putin comes across as more   believable than Our Own First Marxist!

One lump of plutonium, or two? It’s a sad day when Vlad Putin comes across as more believable than our own First Marxist!

One such country is clearly Russia. We know this because Vladimir Putin, who never misses an opportunity to stick his foot out whenever the Bamster is traipsing by, announced last Thursday that Russia had clear evidence that it was the Syrian rebels who used gas on August 21, not Assad. The details were supposedly laid out in a thick report compiled by Russia’s investigative team. Meanwhile, Putin took to the airwaves via Russia’s Channel 1 (a government controlled station) and submitted to an interview with Russia’s First Channel and the AP (which is, of course, also a government controlled news source, the difference being that it is controlled by Obama’s government, not Putin’s). For sheer clarity, charm, and assertiveness, the ex-KGB spook carried the day, creating a striking contrast to the mumbling, hemming, hawing and halting performance of his frazzled American counterpart. The real problem with this interview, at least for those of us who survived the cold war—the really mind jolting aspect of it for any who thrilled to Kennedy’s Cuban missile address where the facts were laid bare and the truth was driven home that any aggression by Cuba would result in a massive nuclear attack launched by the United States against the USSR—or any who recall Patton’s blistering denunciations of Soviet methods offered point blank to a stunned Marshall Zhukov, or any who thrilled to Goldwater’s straightforward anti-Soviet rhetoric from the 1964 campaign, or who rejoiced to hear Ronald Reagan demand, “tear down this wall!” is the perversely alien illation that Putin, the mid-level Soviet apparatchik, won the day for plain speaking and plausibility, vis-a-vis an American president and a Secretary of State who seemed furtive, feckless and perfidious by comparison.

Georgie Patton explains communism to Zukhov's translater--Zukhov obviously hasn't heard the translation yet.

Georgie Patton offers his views on communism to Zhukov’s translator–Zhukov obviously hasn’t heard the translation yet.

We believe that at the very least we should wait for the results of the UN inspection commission in Syria,” Putin said. He reviewed the illogic of Syria resorting to such provocative means of destruction when they were clearly winning conventionally, adding “They know all too well that this could become a cause for sanctions and even for a military operation against them. That’s stupid and illogical.” Regarding John Kerry’s testimony to congress, Putin offered, “Well, he [Kerry] lies. And he knows that he lies. This is sad.” And what’s sadder is that we have come to the unhappy circumstance of finding Vladimir Putin more credible that John Kerry, and more trustworthy than the President of the United States.

And the Sitzkrieg drags on….

Actually, back in the days of LBJ, Donovan sang about the "war" dragging on, but we can't afford those anymore.

Actually, back in the days of LBJ, Donovan sang about the “war” dragging on, but we can’t afford those anymore.

So here we are, back on the Syrian subject again with nary a bomb dropped nor a SAM shot, and not a step closer to any sort of recognizable resolution. In fact, we seem to be further from one since Our Beloved Helmsman went sort of wobbly with his navy arrayed (and exposed) in the Mediterranean, his prerogatives at least temporarily surrendered to Congress, and his tough earlier ultimatum now surreally ascribed to “the international community,” whatever that is. Indeed, we are now arrived at a place in which the president’s only visible resolve seems to entail his determination to see any sub-optimal outcome in Syria ascribed to some entity, organization, agency or individual other than himself. WOOF figures if nothing else good comes out of this, we are at least assured a place in the Guinness Book of World Records where we will hold (quite possibly in perpetuity) the title for staging the most discussed, debated, explicated, adjusted, commented upon and predeterminedly circumscribed offensive in the history of  modern warfare.  Indeed, no matter what else we may be accused of subsequently, it can never be said that we engaged in anything so craven as a surprise attack! And no matter how superbly our military may perform, if called upon to perform, it can never be said, either, that an authentic act of war transpired…unless by complete accident! Because no matter what Barack Obama and his domesticated Joint Chiefs may eventually serve up as Bashar Assad’s just deserts, and no matter how picturesque and noisy this committee-generated beau geste  proves, the action is foreordained to fit that famous descriptive flourish uttered by French Marshall Pierre Bosquet, who, upon witnessing the charge of the Light Brigade in the Crimean War, remarked to his dumbfounded aide de camp: “It is magnificent, but it is not war…” adding, after a moment’s thought, “It is madness.”

Where's Erol Flynn when we need him?

So…where’s Errol Flynn when we need him?


%d bloggers like this: