WOOF! Watchdogs of Our Freedom

Archive for October, 2013|Monthly archive page


In "The horror...the horror!" forum on October 31, 2013 at 9:29 pm


Happy birthday to us….

It just so happens (and it truly does just so happen) that WOOF entered the blogosphere with its first rather hesitant and ill-configured web post on October 31, 2012…so when we checked back to determine this fact, we realized we were born on Halloween. This seems thoroughly ironic, given that we are the least scary and most lovably good natured website in cyberspacial history—and also because some WOOF members do not hold Halloween in particularly high esteem–but we are not the kind to let a coincidence go to waste. Perhaps you’ve noticed? So, we decided first of all to wish ourselves a happy birthday in this article.

imagesfrSo, happy birthday to us, your dedicated and jovial band of troglodytic counter-revolutionaries bringing you the latest thoughts, observations and paranoiac suspicions from the outer fringes of what John McCain would call the “wackabird” Right. Ensconced here in our secret cave on the shores of the fierce Atlantic, we spent our first year ducking drones and clawing our way (doggedly, as it were) out from beneath commie cyber attacks while bringing you the latest and oftentimes painful-but-also-strangely-amusing truth about “…a conspiracy so immense, an infamy so black, as to dwarf any in the history of man.”  And what makes something like that amusing in any way shape or form? Well, what made all those (understandably) anonymous political cartoonists in France mock the French revolution, even in its midst? There is always something inherently hilarious about parvenus seizing power and running zanily amok, just as it seems there are always some wackabirds foolish enough to guffaw at it all when common sense dictates restraint—and we at WOOF will keep right on unabashedly scoffing until we have to defend our cave against the adversary’s final onslaught, reaching defiantly even then into our long-hidden stockpile of flintlock pistols and Bowie knives. (How conservative is that?)

Remember Scott Forbes in the Adventures of Jim Bowie? That was a good show.

Remember Scott Forbes in “the Adventures of Jim Bowie?” That was a good show.

So if you like laughing at the endless cavalcade of morons in media, the farcical antics of all those inside-the-beltway bezonians who govern us, and the relentlessly ventilated vulgarities of Hollywood’s homogeneously liberal but embarrassingly vacuous glitterati, then check us out during our second year! We surged during the year now passed from three or four views per day during our first week to –well—okay, a couple of hundred on our good days now, twelve months later. But mark our words, gentle readers, we will be so big by the end of 2014 (assuming the nation as a whole manages to make it that far), your kids will demand to wear WOOF-dog masks to trick or treat in—which will be kind of sad, come to think of it, because we don’t make WOOF dog masks… but we digress.

imageswwHow, we asked ourselves, could we tie this first year’s anniversary into the Halloween theme, and provide substance beyond a mere recitation of our own thus-far-modest. albeit fascinating attainments? The answer occurred to us after a bit of contemplation. We resolved that our self-congratulatory birthday announcement should be succeeded by a compendium of tales of horror and subversion (to the degree that subversives tend to horrify us, and probably do you, also, since you’re still reading this—or else you’re just very excursive and open minded, for which we thank you).  So what follows, dear readers, is a farrago of travesties and gaucheries supplied for your amusement by the socialist totalitarian conspiracy that governs us, and its pals. We thoughtfully and painstakingly divided these items into categories we thought redolent with the spirit of the season—and we hope you find them as scary, horrific, grotesque and macabre as we do—because the whole idea on Halloween, if we correctly understand the principle, is to be frightened, or frightening. So to begin with, let us turn our thoughts to the best McCarthyite science fiction film ever committed to celluloid, the (original) 1956 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Remember that one? Kevin McCarthy (no relation to Joe but evocative nonetheless) plays a country doctor who discovers the population of his small town is being replaced by identical-looking but emotionless alien duplicates bent on gradually taking over and collectivizing our society for the “greater good.” Tellingly, people seem to transmute into these soulless simulacra only if they fall asleep.  So our hero fills his pockets with Benzedrine, grabs his girlfriend (the incredibly gorgeous though incongruously British Dana Wynter) and makes a break for it, pursued by the collectivist entities from space.

Dana and Kevin make a break for it in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" (1956).

Dana and Kevin make a break for it in “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” (1956).

Finally, the doctor makes his way alone (because they got Dana in her sleep, darn it) into a neighboring town, but he is disheveled and appears mad. On the verge of being packed off to the loony bin by the constabulary and a consulting psychiatrist, the frantic doctor finally gets his point across thanks to fortuitously corroborative testimony from another visitor to the police station. Suddenly persuaded that the nation is indeed under attack by an enemy within, the shrink who was about to commit our hero snatches up his telephone, and shouts into it: “Operator, get me the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Yes, it’s an emergency!”


“Great Scott–it’s beginning to resemble Owen Lattimore!”

And so our favorite scary movie has an ending that resounds with hope—the alarm is sounded–perhaps in time! Today, unfortunately, if you called the FBI, you wouldn’t get the dedicated patriots of Hoover’s elite law-enforcement branch. No, you’d get some politically correct Islamophiliac Janissary of the Obama Nation—and if you suggested fighting communist subversion rather than infiltrating right-wing militias or eking out files on Tea Party members, you might get tossed into the same rubber room they were going to put Kevin McCarthy in.  So how’s that for scary? But don’t worry about that right now—we have other snippets of the weird and bizarre to run by you!


imagecreepy uncleJust to keep it kind of fair, let’s begin over on the right where we have “Creepy Uncle Sam.”  Have you heard of him?  He’s a recurrent figure in a series of television and web promos the basic idea of which seems to be scaring the uniformed voter, particularly in the 18-30 demographic, into recognizing Obamacare for the disaster it is.  How, or even whether, this is accomplished has come under some scrutiny, however. Many left-to-center bloggers prefer to tell one another the ads will prove unpersuasive owing to their emphasis on repulsiveness, with “creepy Uncle Sam” showing up in some over-the-top scenes in which he frightens young ladies during medical exams, or spooks poor “Chad,” a millennial type who is home alone on Halloween night when “Sam” comes trick-or-treating and demands all the candy. The “Chad” ad is WOOF’s personal favorite.

Interested readers may view a sample of Creepy Uncle’s shenanigans by [clicking here!]. WOOF has viewed most of the ads and agrees for once, however briefly, with TIME, which calls the segments a “canny bit of marketing.”  The character is a creation of Generation Opportunity, a conservative political action group backed by those indispensable American patriots Charles and David Koch. The ads have gone viral, as the saying goes, and will undoubtedly score a bull’s eye on the college-aged generation—especially inasmuch as each passing day proves them truer and truer. As for the notion that Uncle Sam is disrespectfully appropriated by the video makers, well, he’s seen worse abuses. He looks to us like a creepy Uncle-Samish version of that stiff, studiedly artificial monarch who paraded around in the Burger King Ads, remember him? The Generation Opportunity filmmakers have simply created a complimentary pastiche, in our opinion…but one that may serve to increase the numbers of young who reject the Affordable Health Care rip-off.

Do you want health care with that order? WOOF sees the Burger King as Creepy Uncle Sam's main inspiration.

Do you want health care with that order? WOOF sees the Burger King as “Creepy Uncle Sam’s” probable  artistic forbearer.

Curse of the forbidden sombrero…

Meanwhile, back at the University of Colorado at Boulder, Uncle Sam may be the only costume that does not seem to horrify Dean of Students Christian Gonzales, and that’s probably only because he didn’t think of it.   “If you are planning to celebrate Halloween by dressing up in a costume,” Gonzales warned the student body, “consider the impact your costume decision may have on others in the CU community,” whereupon followed a lengthy enumeration of costume ideas that might prove offensive to the evidently fragile sensibilities of the “diverse CU community.” Even dressing up like a cowboy is ruled out (because they are a “crude stereotype”), together with Indian, geisha, and “squaw,” costumes, not to mention any costume involving a sombrero or a serape. And there’s still more horror. Gonzales goes on to report discovering that, “some students have also hosted offensively-themed parties that reinforce negative representations of cultures as being associated with poverty (‘ghetto’ or ‘white trash/hillbilly’), or with crime or sex work.” So, is it worrisome to the worthy provost that crime and sex work may be portrayed by “negative representations,” or is that syntax accidental? WOOF can’t be certain, but we are sure that Dean Gonzales is the perfect post-secondary party pooper this Halloween.

Clearly, costumes in violation of Dean ban could create awful impressions by portraying insensitive stereotypes!

Clearly, costumes in violation of Dean Gonzales’s ban could create awful impressions by portraying insensitive stereotypes!

And some costuming news on the welcome side!

Everybody knows the dress cap for a male marine—it’s on recruiting posters, on TV recruiting ads, you know: “The few, the proud…” and yes, we are including a picture here in case some of you newer arrivals to our site cannot quite place the traditional topper on account of planned cultural illiteracy inflicted on you by the public school system.

As you can see, girls look great in the girls' cover, whereas guys look...well...you can see what they look like, right?

As you can see, girls look great in the girls’ cover, whereas guys would look…well…you can see what they’d look like, right?

Easily winning this October’s award for worst new costume idea, the Defense Department came up with the brainstorm of putting a female cap on the head of every male in the United States Marines. Yes, they really meant to do this, gentle readers, with no significant objection raised by anyone for several weeks until the idea became public. The move was apparently proposed by Our Beloved Helmsman himself, with the full approval of Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel. The regime’s desire to see every Marine go unisex was passed down via internal memo, subsequently leaked to the New York Daily Post. This seems especially odd given the Secretary of Defense’s many recent complaints that the spending cuts his administration has inflicted on the American military are terrible, and all the fault of sequestration, of course. We say odd not only because that is a ridiculous assertion, but also because even if it weren’t, the fact would remain that putting every male gyrene in a girly cap comes with the projected cost of an additional $8,221,958.  So why on earth is this deemed desirable by Barack and Chuck?

Commandant Amos is not amused! (And he's not wearing that stupid hat!)

Commandant Amos is not amused! (And he’s definitely not wearing that stupid hat!)

The Corps (or corpse, as our president prefers to say) has functioned fairly well up until now with two dress uniform hats, one for boys and one for girls.  A glance at the photo accompanying this screed should be sufficient to demonstrate to any reasonable individual that the young lady looks great in the female cap, and the young man looks ridiculous in it. That’s because boys are different from girls, Mr. President—surely you’ve noticed?  Fortunately, the project made it only as far as Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos who put a sudden end to it, remarking bluffly that “The Marine Corps has zero intention of changing the male cover.”  Thus, the USMC was saved from the uni-sexual depredations of the Obamans, but the very idea of putting male Marines in girl’s caps remains one of the scariest images of the season!


You can’t have a scary Halloween without some good mad doctor stories, right? Doctor Frankenstein, of course, and Dr. Moreau’s House of Pain, and Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde…and so on…but the best mad doctor story this October is definitely Obamacare, which made a lot of doctors mad –and comes with a cavalcade of tricks and treats tailor-made for the season!

The trick part is easy, isn’t it!  Our Beloved Leader told us that his signature legislation would reduce the cost of health insurance “by $2,500 per family per year!” Per year? We loved that part! What does that even mean? Well, no matter—the treat is: the luckiest among us will wind up paying double or triple for health insurance from “the exchanges,” while scads of us will lose our insurance plans and pay “taxes” (otherwise known as fines) to excuse the fact that we can’t afford the absurdly expensive Obamacare options!

Bela Lugosi was a great mad doctor in Ed Wood's "Bride of the Monster," but he didn't do government work!

Bela Lugosi was a great mad doctor in Ed Wood’s “Bride of the Monster,” but he didn’t do government work!

Trick: “If you like your doctor,” the president famously asserted, “you will be able to keep your doctor—period!” How many of us fell for that one? Well, not us, of course, but we use the term “us” here with a certain empathetic expansiveness. And the treat is: almost 90 percent of America’s doctors say they have considered leaving their practices as a result of Obamacare, and in most cases you can absolutely not keep your current doctor unless your current doctor is a Namibian-trained Serb named Bratislov working out of a storefront clinic 87 miles from your home. And of course, the above described trick came with the ancillary trick: “If you like your current health care plan, you’ll be able to keep it,” which should have been asterisked with “if it’s still there after we get done refusing to grandfather it, which it won’t be!” Which is why the treat is:  your insurance company is going to be forced by the irresistible impetus of simple arithmetic to terminate your policy—and the extra-bonus trick that goes along with that is: The Obama Administration gets to claim that your mean old insurance company ruthlessly disposed of you, which permits the Obamans to steer you toward their real goal, and the biggest treat of all:  The all-government-all-the-time single-payer health system! (BOO!)

Trick: “Obamacare will create employment opportunities for Americans!” Treat: This is true if you consider working fewer hours and earning less money represents an opportunity. Obviously, small business in America is being smashed to a pulp by the new regulatory demands of socialist health care, and a quick solution for harried employers is to move full-time employees to part time hours. Again this gives the administration the opportunity to claim private businesses are simply far crueler than it ever could have anticipated!

obama-doctor-glove-204x300Trick: President Obama solemnly insisted, “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits—either now or in the future, period.” (Say, remember when they used to make fun of McCarthy for saying “period!” a lot? No, you probably don’t—but at least Joe meant it! And the treat, of course, is that even if we stick with the relatively conservative estimates of the Government Accountability Office (fondly known as the GAO), Obamacare will increase our deficit (which the president just assured us was shrinking, if we recall correctly?) by a whopping 6.2 trillion dollars.

And the best trick of the whole Halloween season? The elitists who shoved this socialist chef-d’oeuvre down our throats also made very certain that they and their families and associates were all personally exempt from it.  Harry Reid even managed to exempt his state of Nevada en toto from the majority of the act’s most oppressive ingredients.  Thanks, gang!


indexhorror island This one reminds us of the vastly under-appreciated crazed–body-chopping-robot-assembling-aliens-who-are-actually-computer-viruses movie, Virus(1999) Remember that one? No—probably not. Well, see, these salvagers are down on their luck but they discover this drifting Russian satellite tracking ship so they climb aboard and find things in very spooky condition—and then—really bad stuff starts to happen, and it all has to do with what’s in the ship’s computer systems. Ugh!  And then there are all those spooky island movies from the older days, like who will ever forget Universal Studio’s black and white epic, Horror Island from 1941?  Well—probably most people never knew about it to begin with, but anyway… it had “Fuzzy” Knight in it, remember him? Okay, never mind.

imagesvirusFast forward to San Francisco Bay where another kind of mystery island –or derelict Russian satellite tracking ship if you use your imagination hard enough– has been discovered! It’s a huge floating barge with four stories of shipping containers stacked on its deck, forming a kind of habitat and work area. Thin vertical slits serve as windows and each level has an enclosed gangway that descends to the ground level. The barge in San Francisco Bay is not legally registered to be afloat there, but nobody in the area Coast Guard is willing to discuss it.  Floating near Treasure Island, which lies between San Francisco and Oakland, the unmarked barge is called “the secret project” by locals who offer various home-grown ideas about the mystery. Word of a more informed nature has developed to the effect that the barge is a floating data center resembling copyrights submitted by Google in 2009. Google, however, refuses to respond to requests for information.

And like in any good spooky movie, just when you think you have one mystery, you have two. A nearly identical barge has been located in Portland, Maine. This one is undergoing construction, and The construction company working on the barge and the Portland Harbormaster refuse to comment on the barge’s ownership or purpose. Recently, a reporter trying to photograph the barge, (docked at Ricker’s wharf by the way, if you want to take a peek), was asked to leave the area. A Portland Coast Guard station spokesman assured reporters, “We know what’s inside,” but would not comment further.

The mystery barge under construction in Portland, ME, shocking close to WOOF's secret cave. Coincidence? We think not!

The second mystery barge under construction in Portland, ME, shockingly close to WOOF’s secret cave. Coincidence? We think not!

So, is it Google, and if so, what is Google up to? Are they using these hugely expensive and problematic barges as floating R&D centers aboard which they intend to develop a product line competitive with Apple? That’s the rumor, but WOOF smells a cover story. Something far more sinister may be afoot—err—afloat. Google has been very good to WOOF, and we are reluctant to bite the hand that nurtures us, but are these data collection sites being assembled in furtherance of the NSA’s exertions to commit espionage against the American people?  One barge might suffice to develop a product line, but two?  “I am very surprised to hear there is another one,” said Jonathan Koomey, a data-center technology expert at Stanford University, “This is fascinating.” We agree. Especially fascinating because while one barge might suffice to gather data on the western half of the nation, the other is being assembled suspiciously near our secret cave…and may in fact be targeting Watchdogs of Our Freedom!  Or, it could always turn out to be under-appreciated crazed–body-chopping-robot-assembling aliens who are actually computer viruses…possibly.  


D.B. Cooper

D.B. Cooper

Have you ever noticed that stuff disappears all the time? And besides the routine examples like car keys, glasses, socks and mittens, there are more mysterious vanishings—like the ships, crews and planes that disappear in the Bermuda Triangle, or Judge Crater, or take Louis Le Prince, the 19th century French inventor who created the world’s first motion pictures. Louis had the world at his feet, but vanished from a speeding train never to be found. First Lieutenant Felix Moncla and his radar operator, Second Lieutenant Robert Wilson, flew their F-89 Scorpion out over Lake Superior in 1953 from Kinross AFB to check out a massive UFO. Back at Kinross, radar operators watched the plane’s blip merge with the huge unidentified blip on radar, and plane and crew were never seen again. And there was “D. B. Cooper,” of course, and the boxer Jim Robinson who survived a bout with Mohammed Ali but vanished from the face of the earth in 2009—and so on. Now, WOOF considers it rather obvious that a lot of this is rationally attributable to abductions carried out by flying saucers or by the denizens of the hollow earth, but some kinds of disappearances simply resist such logical explanation! For example:

Disappearing news stories!

The National Broadcasting Corporation, which is practically a subsidiary dis-informational arm of the Obama Administration, astonished everyone on both sides of the political divide when it took a heterodox bounce and reported a news story that portrayed the administration in a negative light. The story was the kind of thing that might evoke yawns from WOOF readers or the conservative cognoscenti in general, but seemed to send shock waves through certain segments of the “independent” and center-left demographic wherein, WOOF has learned, it is apparently not uncommon that people listen to Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, Nancy Pelosi or even Barack Obama and assume that they are hearing the truth.


Yes, last Tuesday an NBC website article appeared revealing that (gasp!) the Obama administration knew as early as 2010 that millions (50 to 75 percent) of Americans would not be able to keep their health insurance under Obamacare, despite which fact Our Dear Leader repeatedly and emphatically promised the contrary. Yes, somebody at NBC actually dug up the details and found that the law was rewritten after passage to render its own grandfathering clause impossible to conform to.  For millions of voters who evidently went to the polls believing they were about to get free or “affordable” health insurance or hang onto the plans they were comfortable with, this had the impact of a rogue meteor striking Anytown, USA. Minds were blown, paradigms were shattered, and while good-hearted but weak-witted Obama believers across the fruited plain were bollixed by the sudden effusion of reality from NBC, a previously reliable source of the strict party line, the Obama regime was no less consternated! Calls were made, shouts were shouted into the appropriate receivers, and hence into the appropriate ears at NBC, and the story vanished! Poof! It was gone as mysteriously as it arrived, with nary a bleat of explanation.

Shocked Obama voters discover that Democrats lie!

Shocked Obama voters discover the president lied!

But too many had already remarked the story, and its disappearance became bigger news on the right than the president’s perfidies, which were in any case common knowledge in more dextral environs. And so, the embarrassed yanking of this accidental moment of objective journalism became a source of derisory laughter on the radio right, echoing through the conservative blogosphere, and bestirring curiosity from other, less alert venues of “news.” Now the pressure built on NBC to explain the sudden disappearance, so the network zagged, putting the story back up, blaming a “publication glitch” for its brief excursion in limbo….but the article reappeared without its most damnatory paragraph, to wit:

“None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date — the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example — the policy would not be grandfathered.”

Gosh, and that was our favorite paragraph, too! But too many bloggers had copied the initial story, and ultimately even this most accusatory paragraph had to be restored.  No editorial note has been appended elucidating the paragraph’s previous removal, but we bet it was another publishing glitch—they are epidemic on the Left these days!

And then there were the 2 million bikers who vanished from Washington DC!

imagesf19 vert

Flight 19– “Don’t come after us, they look like they’re from the government!!”

Forget Flight 19, those five Navy “Avenger” TBM aircraft that disappeared in the Bermuda triangle—their story, while piquant, does not begin to compare for scope and strangeness with the events surrounding nearly two million motorcyclists who roared into our nation’s capital on September 11th, partly to put to shame the “Million Muslim March,” (actually about 25 individuals who tastefully chose the anniversary of the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers to assemble in Washington, DC).  But the bikers’ larger goal, as one of them put it, was to bear witness to the fact that “We’ve got to revive our country and do something different than we’re doing. It’s time it had a resurrection.”

Bikers invade Washington DC--and disappear into the media hole!

Bikers invade Washington DC–and disappear into the media hole!

So almost two million noisy bikers crammed the streets of Washington DC for a full day last September, without a permit, and essentially shut the place down. They did so peacefully, and for purely patriotic purposes, and you would be hard pressed to discover anyone who heard a word about it, so silent were the media. Without a leftist template to fit the bikers to, and absent a nasty incident to focus on, the Liberal Establishment simply colluded to wax mute, and the entire event occurred within an eerie pocket of silence—as though the bikers were never there at all. The bikers vowed to return, but in WOOF’s opinion their next target needs to be the various network news offices in New York City!


Say, has anybody seen any GREEN energy? You know, the power of the future that was supposed to guide us into a new 21st Century world of carefree travel and low-cost energy for our homes and businesses? The market sector where so much of the stimulus went that was supposed to repair our highways and bridges? (Probably the President figured we wouldn’t need highways and bridges if we all had flying cars!) Like, where’s that Solyndra outfit? We the people handed them 535 million dollars, so they must be booming right about now, right? Oh, that’s right, they filed for bankruptcy. First Solar—they got 1.46 billion dollars—so where are they just now? Bueller?….Beuller? What about Evergreen Solar, who received a tidy 25 million? Bankrupt? How can this be?  Raser Technologies got 33 million—and went bankrupt. Range Fuels got 80 million—and went bankrupt. Konarka Technologies got 20 million—and, oops, they went bankrupt too. WOOF could go on and on here, gentle readers, truly we could, but we are sensitive to overwhelming you with depressingly redundant detail.

But can we blame the president for putting so much hope, and so much cash, into new, efficient, clean, safe sources of energy? Welll….yeah. We can.


Take a gander, if you have the nerve this Halloween, at the post-apocalyptic realm of the Abound Solar Manufacturing Facility in Longmont, Colorado. We the people gave Abound 400 million in stimulus dollars, but when Abound went bankrupt, it didn’t just fade into that good night. It left behind a toxic cesspool of environmental nightmares, known carcinogens, contaminated water tables, and of course a lot of broken glass, because all that solar energy is pretty glass intensive, apparently.  Yes, the Abound fiasco left behind 37,000 square feet of hazardous waste that will cost an estimated 4 million additional dollars to clean up. The offices are falling down, and too contaminated to lease in any case. The idea of selling off inventory to pay for clean up has been abandoned, because there isn’t any. Inventory, including 2,000 finished solar panels that nobody wanted, has vanished…only the toxins and collapsing buildings remain.

The toxic remains of the Abound Facility stand out starkly against the Colorado sky!

The remains of the Abound Facility stand out starkly against the Colorado sky–toxic and glass intensive!

How can this be, gentle readers? Wasn’t it only yesterday (all right, 2010) that Our Beloved Leader told us, among other things, that  “Abound Solar Manufacturing…will manufacture advanced solar panels at two new plants, creating more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs.” Oh well. The only jobs created turned out to be for lawyers and waste-removal bidders, which fact prompted the National Legal and Policy Center to observe:

“If a coal, oil or gas company pulled something like that the EPA would send out SWAT teams and the U.S. Marshals to track down the offenders, bankrupt or not.”

So where were the EPA and its attendant enforcers on this one? The fact is, manufacturing solar panels requires the use of several known carcinogens including cadmium, which is nothing to mess around with—and yet the derelict factory sites of bankrupt green-energy manufacturers are left largely to rot. Is there a reasonable explanation? WOOF hypothesizes that sequestration has limited the EPA’s ability to respond to a full spectrum of environmental threats, requiring them to limit their focus to maximally menacing operations such as those of the Gibson guitar company (which you may recall was raided with “evidence” of illegal wood importation seized on three separate occasions because they gave large amounts of money to Republican candidates), or gold miners in Chicken, Alaska, (WOOF is not making this up) who were raided by heavily armed EPA agents in full body armor in a driving snow storm on suspicion of causing water pollution, (because Our Beloved Leader really dislikes Alaska—guess why),  and rampaging into the Eel River Hydroponics Store in Fortuna, California, M-4s at the ready. We haven’t figured that one out yet at all. But at least the crucial stuff is getting covered!

Our EPA at War

A precision team of EPA commandos moves undeterred through a snow storm in an effort to neutralize the notorious gold miners’ cartel operating out of Chicken, Alaska!

Okay, Woofketeers, we can’t go further into the scariest events of the season without running the risk of becoming one of them ourselves—our heads might explode. So we will conclude this modest offering by wishing those of you who are not offended by the premise, a very merry (Happy? Joyous? Convivial?) Halloween. If you are going trick-or-treating, don’t get run over by any of those DHS Mine Resistant Armored Protection Vehicles, okay? And please make certain that your costume is one that will pass muster at American universities. One that reflects diversity…say, Frankenstein was diverse, wasn’t he? Maybe he’d be okay. And if you get a lot of candy, don’t tell Michelle Obama—she’ll get upset. And don’t come to the WOOF cave—we keep all our candy for ourselves. (Maybe we read too much Ayn Rand.)  Besides, you’d never find us (unless you’re the EPA) and we’re not coming out until all this weirdness subsides!

Talk about diversity--hey--Frankenstein was a whole assortment of dead people, and look behind him! He was into clean energy, too!

Talk about diversity—Frankenstein was a whole assortment of people, wasn’t he? And look behind him! He was into clean energy, too!

SEVEN DAYS IN MAY REVISITED–What happens if the government is overthrown by the government?

In "The World Turned Upside Down" forum on October 18, 2013 at 5:26 pm

seven in may right on

Remembering Kennedy-era fiction–a half-hearted homage:

Woofketeers, once upon a time in our land there were liberals of the Jack Kennedy type (assuming that JFK may even be regarded as liberal in today’s political mix) and they cared about things. They cared about the Constitution of the United States, and they cared about justice, and they really, really cared about peace, and not having a nuclear war with Russia—they were big on that one. Some of you may recall those days. And many of these idealists were authors whose books always got made into feature films by idealistic liberals in Hollywood; and most of these authors agreed that the greatest threat to their liberal ideals would come in the form of a bunch of well-intentioned but hopelessly misguided right-wing nutcases, probably in the military, attempting to seize control of the government or starting World War III or doing both simultaneously.  Initially, in fact, these authors were not particularly disparaging of such misguided right wingers. They treated them with only slightly condescending sympathy.  Like, in Fail Safe, which taught us that if we didn’t get rid of our nuclear weapons we would probably have a computer glitch and our Air Force bombers, albeit flown by well intentioned and heroic men, would wind up blowing up New York, remember?

"Darn it, we blew up Moscow--now I have to blow up New York!"

Larry Hagman and Henry Fonda in “Fail Safe” (1964) “Darn it, we blew up Moscow–now I have to blow up New York!”

And then we had that intriguing naval saga, The Bedford Incident that showed us that placing our navy destroyers in the hands of dedicated, hard-core patriots would inevitably cause one of them to accidentally blow up a soviet submarine (that was in any case just minding its own business) and cause World War Three….and in case you didn’t get the idea from the book, the movie was even more helpful in clarifying this understanding because it came out in 1964 (the Goldwater vs, LBJ election, right?) and Richard Widmark, who played the misguided but patriotic right-wing skipper, wore strangely incongruous horn rim glasses that were, if you thought about it or absorbed the matter subconsciously, an exact match for Barry Goldwater’s—so, get it? Goldwater meant well too, but you just knew that if he got elected he’d probably accidentally blow up a Russian sub too, and –well—there goes planet earth!  (Granted, some viewers may have gotten the impression that Buddy Holly or B.F. Skinner would accidentally blow up a Russian sub, but Hollywood is over a lot of peoples heads!)

Oops, we started World War Three! (You have to see the film to catch the scenes with Widmark in Barry's horn rims!)

“Oops, we started World War Three!” (You have to see the film to catch the scenes with Widmark in Barry’s horn rims!)

Now, in these days of which we speak, Woofketeers, there lived a young author named Fletcher Knebel, and he wrote a lot of these types of books too—especially the ones where the well-intentioned but hopelessly misguided right-wingers were always going to take over the government for the good of the country because some “weak sister” American president (usually played by Fredric March) was getting too solicitous of the Ruskies so the well-intentioned but hopeless paranoid right-wingers wanted to stop it by any means necessary. And Mr. Knebel’s best work to this effect (although Night of Camp David wasn’t bad either) was definitely Seven Days in May. You may have even seen the flick because even though it’s old and dated in numerous ways, its plot surrounds the Preakness, so it gets played around triple-crown time on the classic movie stations and some of the network affiliates.

Lancaster in "7 Days"--a surprising number of his countrymen have lately wondered where he is when we need him.

Lancaster in “7 Days”– where is he when we need him?

The main hook, or “the McGuffin” (as Hitchcock would say) was the same in the book and in the subsequent movie script by Rod Serling—namely that this egomaniacal Air Force general, played by Burt Lancaster, was going to stage a coup and take control of the government to save us from an arms treaty that would cede nuclear supremacy to the Reds—and this was a Kennedy-era liberal’s worst nightmare…the military take over part, that is, not letting the Reds get ahead. So Kirk Douglass played a Marine officer who found out what was going on and saved America from Burt Lancaster. The constitution was saved, and nobody ever explained why Congress didn’t simply refuse to ratify the treaty if it was so bad—but we digress.


Right-wing extremists were at it again in this subsequent Knebel page-turner!

Our point here, Wooferians, is that for decades and decades a fear was routinely expressed by liberals that the Right Wing, left unchecked, would find a means of dissolving the Constitution and establishing a military dictatorship, or a dictator whose authority was vouchsafed by the military. You may know Liberals who honestly believe (because they tell themselves this, and teach it to one another in school) that the opposite of a liberal is a fascist. This is silly. The opposite of a liberal is a social conservative, and no aspect of the American experiment is more desirable to preserve for a conservative than its foundational documents and their original understanding. We have said so for decades now, but Liberals cannot bring themselves to believe that the amplification of liberalism (which is essentially utopianism) is fascism, or communism—two sides of the collectivist coin. But we don’t have enough space to explain this in detail, so we hope the majority of our readers already get it.  In any case, the proof is visible in events, so one need hardly wax tediously theoretical.

Why can’t presidents just take over the country?    

Well, first of all, it’s not legal, obviously. The executive branch is only one branch of three equally powerful and counterbalanced components of the government. The president commands the military, but he must do so within constitutional limits. One reason no president has ever attempted an authentic takeover of the government has long been held to be that the troops necessary to enforce such a power grab and maintain it through the imposition of prolonged martial law, simply wouldn’t do it. The military after all swears its allegiance to the Constitution, not to the President, who is a duly authorized commander in chief only insofar as he seeks to preserve constitutional writ.  If a president should act against the Constitution, he sacrifices any authority he previously enjoyed under its precepts. Simple right?  But left to its own devices, liberalism seems considerably less enamored of the Constitution than formerly supposed. And President Obama seems especially bent on demonstrating the fact.  Let us quickly review:

The Obamacare violations:

obama-doctor-glove-204x300First of all, there’s that mandatory requirement that we buy a product—namely Obamacare–unheard of in the history of our Constitutional Republic, and furthermore that we be fined (or imprisoned, as Nancy Pelosi suggested) if we don’t, which is equally unheard of except that Justice Roberts was nice enough to arbitrarily turn it into a “tax,” which is odd since it didn’t originate in the House, but oh well—and then there’s Obama’s insistence that the individual states increase their Medicare coverage, which he has no legal authority to insist on, but then, he has no legal authority to establish a death panel, either, or as he prefers to call it, “the Independent Payment Advisory Board,” which will be fifteen appointees whose job will be lowering Medicare expenditures—and by the way, IPAB is not subject to external review even though it will control about 13 percent of the federal budget, and kill a lot of grannies. This blatantly violates the separation of powers, but nobody seems to mind…yet.

And speaking of which….

imagesCA5BTE33Despite Obamacare being, however absurdly, the law of the land, our Beloved Helmsman has arbitrarily issued over 2000 waivers to federal employees and cronies and big businesses seeking immunity from it. Harry Reid’s state of Nevada got a blanket waiver (no wonder he’s all for it, eh?) and Nancy Pelosi’s favorite gourmet restaurants in San Francisco are exempt—but not because any such exemptions exist in the law—only because Obama waved his magic wand—which wand, to be sure, is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, and seems particularly abusive of the equal protection clause—just sayin.’

The Government Car business

01125108_Par_89380_ImageFileRemember the auto bailouts? Let’s just take Chrysler. The use of TARP funds to bail out auto manufacturers was illegal. Obama then denied priority to secure creditors (shareholders) by paying them only 30 cents on the dollar (but nobody cared because those guys are a bunch of evil rich people and they deserve to be punished) and the skim went to his cronies in the labor unions. But nobody seemed to mind that very much either. Meanwhile, the atrocity that is known as “Dodd-Frank” enabled Obama to engage in un-reviewed power politics as the whim took him in his corporate dealings. It also gave the Treasury Department power to seize banks. It made it possible for the Consumer Protection Bureaus to make up their own laws, and then enforce them in accordance with their personal interpretations. Pretty gutsy, and, of course, totally unconstitutional.

Oily waters.

You may recall that after the Deepwater Horizon disaster erupted (at least partially due to Obama granting safety waivers to British Petroleum in return for their generous donations to his campaign), and while all the networks were shrieking that life on earth was about to end because of oil leaking into the ocean, Obama responded by issuing a blanket six-month moratorium on all oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. When a federal judge struck down the moratorium as “arbitrary and capricious,” Obama simply ignored the judge. The judge found the government in contempt of court, but since Obama didn’t care, the Liberal Establishment Media didn’t care—so nobody cared.

Remember the BP oil spill? It was supposed to end all life in the ocean, which never happened--but it did end all drilling in the Gulf.

Remember the BP oil spill? It was supposed to end all life in the ocean, which actually never happened–but it did end all drilling in the Gulf.

IRS and the Tea Party

It may be recalled that before he got caught using the IRS to bully Tea Party organizations into inutility, the president had already been caught using the IRS to muzzle political speech by suddenly announcing that certain nonprofit advocacy groups (but only the bad ones that didn’t like the president) would be subject to the gift tax despite the fact that the gift tax was never applied in this fashion to any 501 (C) (4) organization before. When the IRS was confronted, it backed down, but of course we now know it simply moved on to obstructing Tea Party and pro-constitution “non-profits” from receiving the requisite tax status to perform their missions. That the IRS acted at the behest of the administration is blatantly obvious. 

The original Boston Tea Party--boy are those guys going to get a nasty letter from Lois Lerner!

The original Boston Tea Party–boy are those guys going to get a nasty letter from Lois Lerner!

So enough of this, you get the idea—for the first time in American history a president clearly deems the Bill of Rights “a charter of negative liberties” that is inconveniently restrictive of governmental authority and is best dealt with dismissively. It must be admitted here, of course, that “W” Bush famously snapped that the Constitution was “just a goddam piece of paper,” but nobody has flouted such a mindset as casually or as consistently as the incumbent, possibly because Obama could burn the Constitution in the rose garden and the media would restrict their remarks to discussions of his fastidiousness in supervising the attendant safety issues.



Kirk Douglas was the good guy officer in “7 Days” because he was loyal to the president–but the good guy officers nowadays would be conservatives loyal to the Constitution– guess Fletcher Knebel never saw this one coming!

See, once you look at the whole Seven Days in May scenario from the reverse angle—the one with good guy conservatives trying to preserve the Union while a bad guy ultra liberal president attempts to take it over and transform it into a banana republic, the whole operation becomes a different proposition. Viewed from this perspective, the task becomes infinitely simpler. Instead of good-guy Kirk Douglas trying to stop the overthrow of the president from the outside, you have instead the president, on the inside, getting rid of everybody who resembles the Kirk Douglas character. Indeed, you have the systematic stripping from the military of anybody who might fail to prove adequately sycophantic when the chips are down. And together with this, you have a massive effort at liberalization occurring within the armed forces in a frantic effort to shift the military ethos toward political correctness and obeisance to the president rather than the Republic.

Goodbye, good men!

"Mad Dog" is WOOF's favorite leatherneck--but the Obamans may have found him a bit too... authentic?

“Mad Dog” is WOOF’s favorite leatherneck–but the Obamans may have found him a bit too… authentic?

Why was General James “Mad Dog” Mattis (of what the president would call the Marine Corpse) relieved of his crucial duties at US Central Command overseeing wars in the MiddleEast? Mattis, who is author of the sapient motto, “Have a plan to kill everyone you meet,” will officially retire from the Corps in March—considerably earlier than anticipated. What are his sins? Toughness, outspokenness, and an ironclad loyalty to his country? Most of us also recall the unceremonious removal of General Stanley McChrystal from command in Afghanistan after being quoted in Rolling Stone calling Joe Biden “Vice President Bite-me.” Also, General David Petraeus was jerked home, placed at CIA, and chased into retirement by “sudden” revelations of his infidelities with biographer Paula Broadwell (possibly an early catch by the NSA phishing program) which had the additional effect of rendering him taciturn regarding the Benghazi debacle. And speaking of Benghazi, the firings there included Maj. Gen. Ralph Baker, commander of the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa, who was canned last March 28. Baker, was reported to have been fired “because of a loss of confidence.” Really?

General Ham seems to sense time is running out...but why?

General Ham seems to sense time is running out…but why?

Meanwhile, General William “Kip” Ward, was reduced to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel and returned from the service, possibly because of excessive spending sprees and an unduly lavish life style. WOOF KNOWS however that both Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette and General Carter Ham, were fired at Obama’s personal insistence for attempting to interdict the terrorist assault on the U.S. mission in Benghazi.  General Ham, it may be recalled, was the first to dismiss the administration’s movie-protest story as nonsense, telling reporters that it was clearly a terrorist assault. Woof also knows that Ham, at least, was preparing to ignore the stand-down order and proceed to the relief of the Benghazi mission when his second-in-command –an Obama sycophant—saw his moment and forcibly relieved Ham of his command, placing him under arrest for insubordination. And WOOF also knows, so you don’t have to remind us (unless you feel driven) that these assertions are widely considered “debunked” because of the White House’s use of ABC News to denounce this version of events as a creation of right-wing nuts (like us here at WOOF). The ABC story stated that Gaouette was “not fired,” but “replaced temporarily” and reassigned to Bremerton, Washington, pending an investigation into “inappropriate leadership judgment.” WOOF scoffs at this incipient noun chain—and at ABC for lacking the creative juice to confect a better cover story.

Meanwhile, over at missile defense command, the two-star general in charge of all Air Force nuclear missiles was fired a week ago in the immediate wake of another high level officer overseeing America’s nuclear arsenal being similarly sacked (no pun intended). Air Force Maj. Gen. Michael Carey was removed from command of the 20th Air Force, which maintains and controls 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles with “mirved” warheads at three separate bases. No reason for Carey’s firing was given by the Air Force, which nevertheless announced what were not the reasons, insisting it had nothing to do, for instance, with  gambling, or the loss of a nuclear weapon, or sexual misconduct. It probably had nothing to do with torturing puppies, either, but they left that out. Carey’s firing comes two days after the Navy announced it had canned a three-star admiral serving as the deputy commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees all nuclear-armed missiles, bombers and submarines for the United States Navy. Vice Admiral Tim Giardina.

Air Force General Carey--hey, at least he didn't lose a nuclear weapon!

Air Force General Carey–hey, at least he didn’t lose a nuclear weapon!

Gardina remains under investigation for alleged gambling improprieties, as opposed to General Carey who you will recall is not suspected of gambling improprieties, although no one has expressly exonerated Admiral Giardina of losing a nuclear weapon or…or…what is going on here, Woofketeers? Is Our Beloved Leader unfairly saddled with the most incompetent military leadership in our national history, or is something else afoot? As firings continue–including such exemplary men at arms as Major General Ralph Baker, Brigadier General Bryan Roberts, and Lieutenant General David Holmes Huntoon, Jr. of the United States Army, and Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant and Major General Charles M. Gurganus of the USMC, the rumors mount that Christians are being deleted from the office cadres, as well as conservatives and those who show an impolitic hostility toward their Islamic adversaries in the middle east.  That a bizarre effort is underway to make the wartime military more Muslim-friendly is well documented.

The Rand Paul letter….

The media have been almost entirely devoted lately to persuading the American public that Ted Cruz is a raving lunatic, it may as a consequence have slipped our memories that only last March they were equally busy convincing us that Rand Paul was a raving lunatic. Paul, it may be recalled, launched a filibuster of sorts during which he had the gall to say the following:

“If there were an ounce of courage in this chamber, I would be joined by Senators from both parties today, saying that no President has the authority to kill Americans without charge or trial.”


Thirteen hours of Rand Paul started a RINO stampede, but earned a re-write from the Attorney General.

So…the media went to work guffawing at the crazy yawp from backward, inbred Kentucky who was so crazy he thought the President might take to killing U.S. citizens right here in the United States without trial.  Now where, the media asked themselves, as they are wont to do, could anyone get such an addlepated idea, and then waste everybody’s time blathering about it on the floor of the Senate when all the grown-up, experienced senators wanted to get on with serious stuff, like approving the politician John Brennan to head the CIA, and clearing the way for amnesty for illegal immigrants without securing our boarders?

And now, another oldie from the Righteous Brothers!

And now, another oldie from the Righteous Brothers!

In fact, Lindsey Graham and John McCain ducked out of Paul’s performance in order to dine with Barack Obama. Both men later denounced Paul’s efforts from the Senate floor. Graham averred that asking whether the president has the power to kill American citizens on American soil was “a ludicrous question,” adding. “I do not believe that question deserves an answer.” Really, Lindsey? McCain, however, condescended most asininely (though it was admittedly a close contest), telling a leftist media interviewer, “If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously, he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms. He needs to know what he’s talking about!” Of course, if John McCain had really wanted to be president, he might have been well advised to learn how to fire up libertarian college kids, not fawn over his opposition with such incomprehensible alacrity. But more to the point, what evidence did McCain possess suggesting that Paul didn’t know what he was talking about?

Eric Holder contemplates Paul's letter of February 20.

Eric Holder contemplates Paul’s letter of February 20.

Where, in fact, did the raving lunatic yawp—er—Senator Paul, get such a crazy idea? From Obama’s criminal Attorney General himself, in fact, none other than the infamous gun-runner, Eric Holder. The media knew this, of course, but they didn’t care to discuss it, thank you. WOOF on the other hand, feels like discussing it.  See, Rand Paul wrote to Eric Holder, asking him if the blanket authorization by Obama to use drones to assassinate American citizens included American citizens right here in, oh, say, Kentucky. Or anywhere else outside the beltway. Specifically, Paul inquired whether the president “has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and without trial.” So if Paul didn’t know what he was talking about, this was Eric Holder’s opportunity to say so.

Instead, Holder answered Paul on March 4th, and did so in an apparent fit of atypical honesty. His letter read in part:

“The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution…for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.” [Readers may view the entire letter here]

So...just out of curiosity...what happens if we're going too fast?

So…just out of curiosity…what happens if we’re going too fast?

To put an end to Paul’s rantings, presumably on the theory that somebody somewhere might report on their basis if they continued, President Obama prevailed upon Attorney General Holder to contact Paul a second time, so Holder wrote Paul another letter on March 13th saying “”It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no.”

This didn’t come to Holder’s attention the first time he answered the question? (Which was not, just for the record, an “additional question.” ) Nonsense, of course it did—he just altered his response to shut Paul up—the first letter was the truthful one.  Only in the sinistral cosmogony of the Liberal Establishment Media could such malarkey from the Department of Justice pass without notice.  And by the way, when, since Lee’s surrender at Appomattox,  is an American “engaged in combat on American soil”? One rather suspects the answer is, when President Obama says he is.

So long as they just spy on us and don't blow us up, we're probably okay...right?

So long as they just spy on us and don’t blow us up, we’re probably okay…right?

Why William Burroughs was smarter than Graham or McCain:

It seems uncomfortably obvious that the current administration is giving serious consideration to a variety of actions, military in nature, that would perpetuate Our Beloved Helmsman’s stay in office. It seems equally obvious that the awesome information-gathering abilities of the National Security Agency have been turned inward—repurposed as instruments of domestic surveillance. The NSA is now focused to an unprecedented extent on probing the quotidian business of average Americans. Phone records, Facebook pages, Internet browsings, email exchanges, telephone conversations, and now medical and mental health information have all been garnered and stored. This is the behavior of a totalitarian regime, or an administration bent on transitioning into one.

The Bill of Rights was MIA!

The Bill of Rights was MIA!

Military officers, particularly those with combat experience, and especially those with observably patriotic instincts, have been weeded out of the chain of command, and the Secretary of Defense is complicit in this endeavor. Also, Obama now has a political crony (and fellow Islamophile) situated at the helm of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan having won confirmation once Paul yielded the floor in the wake of Holder’s disingenuous second letter. (Oddly, when Brennan took the oath as CIA chief, he swore allegiance to the Constitution with his hand upon an original copy of the 1787 Constitution. This may seem charmingly patriotic until one considers the fact that the 1787 Constitution did not yet contain—the Bill of Rights. And why not the Bible, Director Brennan?)

And while we’re on this subject, why has NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) ordered large numbers of assault rifles and millions of rounds of ammunition? In case of giant squid attack? Why is the Department of Homeland Security now the proud owner of 1.6 billion rounds of ammo, not to mention 2,717 mine resistant urban-assault armored vehicles, many of which have already been observed and photographed patrolling the streets of hometown, USA?

"Good shooting, Agent Johnson--looks like you got him right between the eyes!"

“Good shooting, Agent Johnson–looks like you got him right between the eyes!”

Meanwhile, the Internet is ablaze with the notion that the American military is going to deliver us from Obama by staging a coup, and an amazing number of citizens seem enamored of this idea, Certainly WOOF cannot condone such anti-Constitutional thinking, save, of course, as a countermeasure to any unconstitutional power grab by President Obama—but we aren’t anticipating such an event…at least not a provable one.  We consider it far more likely that Obama has cleansed his High Command of potential troublemakers, and is poised to impose martial law as a means of advancing his power beyond its legal limits.  WOOF worries about this stuff a lot!



How ironic that Nebel’s vision of the presidency being overthrown by right-wing militarists during seven days in May has transmogrified into the current possibility—a Red/Islamist takeover of our government by a communist president of the United States, aided and abetted by an American military under the command of politically motivated generals and admirals. Would such a salient stand any chance of success? All would depend on the swiftness and ruthlessness of its execution, and the degree to which our armed forces might in fact assist or resist the effort—but WOOF insists that even now these questions are being seriously pondered in the Oval Office, and to a large extent acted on through the preparations noted in this article. It may be entirely correct to argue that the majority of American troops would refuse to turn their weapons on fellow citizens–but it seems evident that steps are being taken to rig the chain of command and adjust the odds.

We are, of course, notoriously paranoid, dear readers—but given the weight of circumstantial evidence, it begins to seem less psychotic to assume the worst than to ignore the facts! Come January of 2017, when the Obamas graciously turn the White House over to the newly inaugurated POTUS, (preferably Christine O’Donnell, but, in the event, to whomsoever), we solemnly pledge to publish our profound apologies for suspecting the worst in this matter.  In the meantime, we will persist in suspecting the worst. It was the beatnik author William S. Burroughs, gentle readers, (whose literary and epigrammatic skills WOOF joins Michael Savage in admiring) who once remarked that:  “Sometimes paranoia’s just having all the facts!”


William S. Burroughs

ON THE TRAIL OF THE AMERICAN BULLY! (WOOF does its part observing October as national bullying-prevention month!)

In "Humilis humilibus/ Inflectens Arrogantibus" forum on October 13, 2013 at 1:45 am

final prof bully


WOOF tracks down the worst of the American bullies!

Take a simple premise like: “everybody despises a bully,” okay? And consider that for a moment. If you’re anything like us, you are probably amenable to that premise. In fact, for well over 200 years, Americans have been opposed by tradition and by visceral reflex, to bullying. One might go so far as to say, it was the bullying of the colonies by King George III that resulted in the founding of our Republic.  We not only resisted bullying by going to war with the greatest military power on earth in 1776,  we got fed up with subsequent bullying at sea by the British navy and went to war with England a second time in 1812– a monumentally injudicious act that resulted in our capital being burned by the redcoats– and talk about bullies! The British admiral, Cockburn, was such a sore head that he went out of his way to demolish the office building of the D.C. newspaper National Intelligencer because the paper routinely referred to him as “the ruffian.” He even ordered his troops to destroy all the typeset for the letter “C” so that the paper, once reconstituted, could no longer criticize him.  These points in mind, how could WOOF resist joining in the national bully bashing this October?  October, by the way, was first declared national “bullying prevention month” way back in 2006!

Historically, by the way, things would have gone from awful to totally awful for our nation in the War of 1812, were it not for the Supreme Being, who intervened in Admiral Cockburn’s brutish business by hitting the city with a thunderstorm that quenched the flames, followed in short order by a hurricane that drove the redcoats back to their badly battered ships, but not before spinning off a tornado that tore into the redcoats attempting to occupy Washington DC.  This should not have astonished Cockburn who, as a student of the Old Testament, might have realized aforehand that the Lord has a history of punishing bullies—just ask Goliath—oops, you can’t, he’s dead.

Actually, the War of 1812 went a lot better for us at sea. Here, USS Constitution blows HMS Guerriere to smitherines. Go team!

Actually, the War of 1812 went a lot better for us at sea. Here, USS Constitution blows HMS Guerriere to smithereens. Go team! And of course, Charleton Heston defeated the British Army at New Orleans in 1814, but that didn’t officially count because it turned out the war was already over!

So, as we said exordially, almost every red-blooded American, no matter what his other affiliations or beliefs, instinctively despises bullies.  And given this happy concordance of opinion, how very fortunate that our nation’s schools are focusing on this despicable phenomenon in their class rooms and school yards from sea to shining sea, right?  And it can hardly have escaped the attention of any parent (or school child) that one of the most significant learning activities in our nations schools nowadays involves this very issue. This is important, one gathers, because according to the National Association of Elementary School Principals, “at least 28 percent of students between the ages of 12 and 18 are bullied at school.” In fact, the NAESP goes on to say, “As much as 6 percent of students report having been threatened with harm.” WOOF sees a bit of sunlight in these statistics, because when we went to school almost all bullies threatened whomever they were bullying with harm, so perhaps a kinder, gentler species of bully is evolving? But at any rate, the NAESP concludes that “Maintaining a safe, nurturing school environment for students is any school leader’s top priority.” And we at WOOF could not agree more.

Bullies always seemed to be pretty easy to identify back in the day!

Bullies always seemed to be pretty easy to identify back in the day!

But there is a certain lack of substance in the pronouncement from the NAESP, don’t you think? Like, okay, what exactly are we going to do about these bullies when we locate them, and what do they look like—just who are they? Is there a typological commonality that we can screen for? It appears that this in not the recommended approach, although the new Common Core educational system will be recording facial-metric readings of our children—perhaps this is intended to weed out inchoate ruffians? Meanwhile, from all the school-oriented literature on this subject that WOOF studied, it appears that the only means of correctly identifying a bully is to observe him bullying someone, or to receive a report of him bullying someone. When this occurs, the general idea seems to be that school officials should listen with empathy and compassion—and let the student or the student’s parents (depending on who is reporting the incident) know that reporting the incident was the right thing to do. And just in case this doesn’t immediately fix the problem, developing a school safety plan for the bullied individual is highly recommended, perhaps insisting on different seating arrangements in the class room or on the school bus. If this still doesn’t fix the problem, the NEA (as well you may have suspected) has some concrete suggestions for kids who find themselves confronted by a bully. From the NEA website, here they are in the order proposed:

Five Ways to Handle a Bully

  1. Stay calm and alert. Consider the options and do nothing to escalate the situation.
  2. Walk away. Fighting isn’t worth it. You do not have to prove yourself by fighting.
  3. Take a non-violent stand. Speak respectfully: “I don’t want to fight you.”
  4. Report it to authorities, but discuss with them how you will be protected from retaliation.
  5. Get away. Find safety or call for help.

Oh, and it turns out that sometimes bullies themselves may lack sufficient instruction from their parents on the inadvisability of being bullies! And since the NEA seems firmly of the opinion that all parents of bullies will wish to address the situation immediately and responsibly, it turns out there is plenty for them to do too! For instance, they should see that their child apologizes to the victims he bullies and undoes any damage, such as replacing stolen or destroyed property, or maybe paying for any medical expenses the victim incurred while being bullied? The NEA also advises Parents of bullies to be more careful whom their child hangs out with, and if he is hanging out with a particularly rum lot—like say the Sharks or the Jets or the Symbianese Liberation Army, they should “encourage new friendships.”

apparently bullies are nowadays very open to reconsidering their behaviors if approached properly and respectfully.

Apparently bullies are nowadays very open to reconsidering their behaviors if approached properly and respectfully.

“I feel angry right now!”

Pearson, the subversive textbook publisher that supplies Common Core with the propaganda-laden texts and additional materials requisite to the cold-blooded vitiation of American secondary education, has also been looking into the bullying situation and come to some interesting conclusions. Did you know that kids who are bullied are often loners, or independent types with few friends “and therefore easily isolated?” Okay, you probably did know that–but here’s a twist: Contrary to popular belief, research indicates that bullies frequently have very high self-esteem, although their victims tend to have lower self-esteem, be physically weaker than their tormentors, and lack social self-defense skills.

Some victims skip days of school or are driven to eventually drop out altogether to avoid their tormentors, perhaps because the development of that school safety plan so highly recommended by the NAESP has yet to be fully implemented for them. More encouragingly, special training is being offered school bus drivers and educators on how to employ a marvelous new methodology developed by school psychologists known as “conflict resolution,” although lots more training seems in order considering the amount of school-bus beating videos we keep seeing on the news.  Trainees will receive curriculum guides for elementary, middle and high school students as well as informational posters. These guides will alert them to creative techniques for dealing with peer pressure, how to stage an effective cooling off phase for both parties, and how to develop those “active and reflective listening skills” so beloved of humanistic psychology. Trainees will also hone their anger management skills and master the use of feedback exchanges beginning with “I statements” such as “I feel angry right now…” or maybe,  “I think you just broke my nose.”

Meanwhile, Pearson reports that “Nearly every state has passed legislation defining and prohibiting bullying, often authorizing, encouraging and even requiring local school districts to identify methods to decrease and document bullying, and to find nonviolent methods of conflict resolution.” Another problem solved by the academic and legislative branches of progressivism, one might understandably surmise, n’est ce pas?.

Chase Cristia, 16, an honor student, was beaten and video taped on her school bus. The video was posted on Facebook, but the malefactors were placed on probabtion and they aren't allowed to use social media for the duration!

Chase Cristia, 16, an honor student, was savagely beaten and video taped on her school bus. The video was posted on Facebook by her attackers, but the malefactors were placed on probation and –get this–they aren’t allowed to use social media for the duration! Burn!

Studies indicate….

With such arduous effort put into the elimination of bullying in our nation’s schools, Americans might naturally wonder how bullying in any shape or form can possibly have survived. Well, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the percentage of students aged 12-18 who reported being bullied at school has increased by 24.5 percent since 2003, with the latest data samples released in 2007. Now that strikes WOOF as somewhat odd, because this seems to correlate rather exactly with the rise of anti-bullying campaigns—is it possible that these magnificent programs are having little if any of the desired effect? Might they even be stimulating what scatter chart analysts call a positive correlation? WOOF turned its cyberspacial attentions to some university libraries packed with scholarly research and unearthed a meta-analysis of these programs performed by Ferguson, San Miguel and Kilburn of Texas A&M in Criminal Justice Review, Volume 32 Number 4, which concluded that “although anti-bullying programs produce a small amount of positive change, it is likely that this change is too small to be practically significant or noticeable….Results were best for programs that specifically targeted high-risk youth, although even here, the overall effect size was small.”

indexbullyMore recently, this September in fact, the University of Texas Arlington released a study that found that bullying prevention programs in schools typically increase incidences of physical and emotional attacks among students. The study’s lead scientist, Dr. Seokjin Jeong, explained that “The school interventions say, ‘You shouldn’t do this,’ or ‘you shouldn’t do that.’ But through the programs the students become highly exposed to what a bully is and they know what to to do or say when questioned by parents or teachers.” In short, Jeong’s study shows that students in schools with anti-bullying programs are more likely to be victimized than in schools without them. “This study raised an alarm,” declared the perceptive Dr. Jeong. “Usually people expect an anti-bullying program to have some impact — some positive impact.”

OMG, He's a freaking lizard!!

OMG, He’s a freaking lizard!!

Is somebody promoting bullying? And if so, are they concomitantly promoting submissiveness to bullies? And why on earth would this be going on? Well, the answer is best sought in the philosophies of Karl Marx. Now there’s something we don’t get to say everyday! Let’s look at a quick history of conflict resolution with bullies:  Was it ever successful? As a matter of fact, didn’t it used to be a considerably less complex process than it is today? What accounts for the mammoth increase in incidents? Basically, the same factor that accounts for the massive increase of disciplinary problems across the public school systems and the considerably worsened learning scores that nobody in the field of education seems to be able to explain sensibly. It can be stated rather simply: Nobody has the authority to do anything to anybody in a way that really matters. And why is that, gentle readers? Why are the worst in our midst permitted to walk around cussing out their teachers, pounding the faces of their peers, dressing like refugees from an off-Broadway revival of O, Calcutta, fornicating in the hallways, and using language that twenty years ago would have resulted in their being dragged by the scruff of the neck to the Principle’s office and paddled on their hinder parts? What happened to the grown ups?

Before liberalism took over education, anti-bully technology was fairly low tech!

Before liberalism took over education, anti-bully technology was fairly low tech!

The children of the 60’s “grew up” and had children, dear readers, and when narcissistic dope-smoking overpaid under-educated technocrats, lawyers, and yes, college professors have children, you may rest assured they will enjoy the full protection of the most litigious and utterly solipsistic generation in history. In short: Little Arthur may have told his homeroom teacher to eat s*it and die, but that was little Arthur’s first amendment right—you know, he spoke truth to power. And when his red-faced homeroom teacher threw a stapler at him, it was only right that she was charged with first degree assault and removed in handcuffs.  Arthur could have been seriously injured. That woman was lucky to get off with a suspension! This is a far cry from the schools your gramma and gampa went to, Woofketeers.  Perhaps very different from the school you yourself may recall attending, but the first rule that ramified from the liberalization of education was the law of the sacrosanct student. You may keep him after class, or deny him a few silly tokens, or deprive him of recess, or send a note home, but you may never do anything seriously impressive to him. That would be fascism! (Besides, that’s what the bullies are for!)

imageshaNow here’s an odd fact—did you know that while teachers are often heard to bemoan their powerlessness over the renegade nihilists who reduce their classrooms to chaos nowadays, the teachers unions have traditionally been in lockstep with the litigative classes in promoting such protectionism? Why on earth would that discrepancy exist? Okay, think about this: Why do most beat cops appreciate an armed citizenry and will even give tips to armed citizens on lawful firearms use in the event of crisis, but their police chiefs and commissioners revile the 2nd amendment and speak out against it at every opportunity? Because the standard communist technique for infiltration has always been from the top down, preferably by appointment. And appointees make more reliable allies than the rank and file—because you don’t have to spend a lot of time suborning them; you just locate fellow travelers who are already naïve enough or consciously subversive enough to advance the progressive agenda—and appoint them! Why grow a radical when you can simply insert him or her?

The Blackboard Archipelago

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn during a chill in his literary career.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn during a chill in his literary career.

Time to pay a little visit to Siberia—just to make a point. We won’t be long. Remember how in Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago (we think it’s in volume one, but we’re too lazy to check) he talks about the “Zeks” (the political prisoners) being placed under the control of the ordinary criminals who are given a degree of authority over them in the destructive labor camps?  He explains that the ordinary criminals were considered mere victims of oppression; but the political prisoners were the real louses, they having murmured against the collective and been packed off to gulag as traitors. Thus, the criminal was an exemplar of the Marxist principle of alienation, while the intellectual or common citizen was a hated counterrevolutionary who spoke treason against the state. See the difference? Even the dullest Commissar could figure out whom to put in charge of whom!

Karl--still the least funny Marx brother!

Karl–still the least funny Marx brother!

To oversimplify for the sake of brevity, we shall hurriedly point out that Karl Marx wrote that the law is the mechanism by which one social class (the ruling class) oppresses all other classes, thus retaining them in positions of disadvantage. Pretty basic right?  It will surprise no one, we trust, if we iterate here that Marxists are critical of the ideas, values and norms of capitalist ideology (our society, even now, as perceived by communists). Marxism characterizes the modern democratic state as being under the control of the “holders of the means of production”…you know, the “ruling class.”  Okay, so where are we going with this? Well, it’s really more like where Marx goes with it. See, to make things even harder on the dispossessed, communists argue that political power is used to reinforce economic inequality by embedding individual property rights in the law so the right people stay poor and miserable and subjugated. And this generates criminal behavior simply as a means of survival. The cure for crime, therefore, is socialism, (what else?) but in non-socialist countries like ours (sort of) honest citizens become alienated and experience “anomie” which is really bad.  And anomie is (well it’s a word, obviously, but…) from a communist standpoint it’s: the chief cause of crime in non-communist countries! See, Comrade Joe Six Pack is just going about his daily life in the capitalist hell hole called North America, trying his best to get along on the crumbs tossed him by the capitalist pigs who exploit him in conjunction with the theory of surplus value (but we digress), when whamo, he runs smack dab into a bad case of anomie. Now, in English, anomie just means the breakdown of social bonds between an individual and the community– the fragmentation of social identity and consequent rejection of personal adherence to social mores. So, to translate from communist, Comrade Joe Six Pack is so oppressed, frustrated and alienated because of being constantly exploited by the capitalistic ruling elite, that he just suddenly robs a bank, or shoots a stranger on a beach, like that Camus dude. Let’s make it simple and say that Joe steals a Slim Jim because he’s hungry because the capitalistic system that oppresses him doesn’t allow him sufficient subsistence to fully assuage his hunger—or maybe just to strike a revolutionary blow against the ruling class. Okay, so if Joe gets caught, the ruling class will use its system of laws to punish Joe, because they see him as criminal. But to the more enlightened Marxist observer, Joe is a revolutionary hero—or at very worst a victim.

And all this having been now explicated, we have one half of the answer to why all the bullying programs aren’t stopping the bullying. They are no more expected to stop bullies than the Gulag was expected to discourage bullying. They are meant to ensure that the right people get bullied!

Remember the fat kid named Casey?

Remember the fat kid by the name of Casey from a couple of years ago who was bulled so much that the punks took turns bullying him while the others taunted him and video taped it? The video went viral when Casey decided he’d had enough and grabbed the aggressive little twerp who was throwing punches at him and flipped him over his shoulder, landing him on the school walkway with a thud. Seemed like an effective interaction to us, but remember the result of that encounter? Casey was suspended. The bullies were not punished.  This is a classic example, Woofketeers. The “zeks” are not supposed to interfere with the criminal classes whose resentments stem from legitimate social alienation!

Media stardom on you tube--fat kid throws bully for a loop! (Fat kid gets suspended).

Attaining media stardom on you tube–fat kid throws bully for a loop! (Fat kid gets suspended).

Remember the Charles Atlas solution to bullying? Gosh it was so illiberal!

Remember the Charles Atlas solution to bullying? Gosh it was so illiberal!

And who are today’s experts on bullying? One of the best known is the author of It Gets Better, Dan Savage, who is by almost anyone’s standard a fairly accomplished bully himself. Mr. Savage is dedicated specifically to helping homosexual kids who get bullied, and WOOF is fine with that, but he achieves this by angrily denigrating the Bible and Christianity whenever he lectures. Recently, he drove several students out of the National High School Journalism conference and reduced some of the departing girls to tears. As they left the lecture room sobbing, the anti-bullying authority yelled, “Pansies!” and explained to his audience that leaving amid his fusillade of hate speech was “pansie-assed!” In fact, the main themes of Savage’s anti-bullying lectures are that “the Bible is BS” and “Everyone should be using birth control!” And these sentiments have so endeared Mr. Savage to Our Beloved Helmsman that the Obama administration has made Savage the center piece of its own crusade against bullying. Orwellian, no? In fact, the White House website not only praises Savage, it connects to his recommended reading list, which has been conservatively (no pun intended) described as hyper-sexualized, running as it does from recommendations on recreational masturbation techniques to insights into how one can increase one’s self esteem by becoming a prostitute. How any of this prevents bullying remains nebulous.

Savage and his "husband" exchange pleasantries with Joe Biden. See? No bullying in progress!

Savage and his “husband” exchange pleasantries with Joe Biden. See? No bullying in progress! Also, it seems rather plain that Biden has no idea whom he’s chatting with!

Calling Count Dante!

Thus, the average American student who finds himself bullied continues to be offered only the most nominal assistance, almost no portion of which is designed to stymie actual bullying. Bullies are permitted to flourish with only the most superficial efforts initiated against them while the help given victims seems either entirely inapposite or of a nature conducive to a nation of Little Lord Fauntleroys—kids who complain to officialdom (if they survive) and rely on centralized  authority to solve their problems. About the only certain way to get expelled or suspended as the result of a bullying incident in an American public school is to be bullied and attempt to defend oneself!  The days when kids sent a couple of bucks to John “Count Dante” Keehan (who was actually an excellent karate black belt despite all the theatrical hoopla) to obtain a copy of The World’s Deadliest Fighting Secrets, or worked out at a gym throwing jabs and hooks in order to master the manly art of self defense, are as long ago as sock hops and hot rods.  And this leads us to the second secret of contemporary bullying programs: To accustom Americans to being bullied. To move them from the era of latchkey kids who settled their differences, often quite bloodily, in the parking lot after school, to their new role as doormat kids, who accept the pounding in the sure and certain knowledge that somebody in officialdom will take a report and file it, and see that it is crunched statistically to determine whether current policies are proving efficacious.

Remember when Count Dante (John Keegan) was in your comic books, recommending sensible ways of dealing with bullies? The Count knew all about conflict resolution!

Remember when Count Dante (John Keehan) was in your comic books, recommending sensible ways of dealing with bullies? The Count knew all about conflict resolution!

Remember Dr. Jeong’s remark? “Usually people expect an anti-bullying program to have some impact – some positive impact.” But Dr. Jeong missed the point. The programs are delivering exactly as intended, because the ostensible anti-bullying emphasis is in reality a training ground for the appropriate style of bullying—the kind best evinced by the likes of Dan Savage, and intended for use by servitors of the “Fundamentally Transformed” States of America. The programs serve merely as conditioning exercises for obsequiousness in the face of bullying—ensuring that none dare respond in the traditional American way…with a solid right cross. No, instead Johnny is being taught to chant his peace mantra, dialogue respectfully with the aggressor, and if necessary, “tell an adult.”  Unfortunately, as Diana West demonstrated in a recent book, there aren’t any adults available any more. Only educators, counselors, sociologists, and the usual assortment of progressives sipping latte in the faculty lounge while discussing “social justice.”

teachers lounge

Got a problem, sonny?

TIME could barely suppress a note of disappointment

TIME could barely suppress a note of disappointment

Now you know the second secret of contemporary bullying programs: To accustom Americans to being bullied, because being bullied is soon to become the new normal. Ask Joe the Plumber who had the audacity to ask candidate Obama a question he mishandled back in 2008. Obama admitted wanting to “spread the wealth around,” and for just a moment the reptoid was visible beneath the attractive human mask. Unforgivable! Poor Joe was savaged by the pro-Obama Democrat media as though he were Squeaky Fromm!  (In fact, when Fromm attempted to shoot Jerry Ford her coverage was comparatively sympathetic!)


Don’t by books by Patriots–isn’t that the old slogan? No wait–that’s not it…

Ask the Rhode Island family of a seventh-grader who was suspended for three days for having a miniature toy gun on his keychain. Ask Ben Carson who experienced harassment by the IRS after embarrassing Our Beloved Leader at the now legendary prayer breakfast (and who was forced to resign his position as chief pediatric neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins for putting a frowny face on Our President). Ask the many CIA employees who were anxious to testify about the Benghazi massacre but were threatened into silence at the behest of the Administration, some even relocated…(making them, admittedly, somewhat harder to ask). Ask an American hero and whistleblower named John Dobson whom WOOF initially reported on back in May [just click here]. This courageous ATF agent revealed the truth about Eric Holder’s plan to undermine the 2nd amendment by illegally running more than 2,000 American guns to Mexican drug cartels and was nearly imprisoned for his efforts to tell the truth. Now that his book about what really happened is about to be published by Simon and Schuster, the Justice Department (still under the criminal mismanagement of Eric Holder) has denied him permission to publish the book “because it would have a negative impact on morale.” (Read: Eric Holder’s morale!)

Meet the REAL bullies!

So who are the most frequently encountered bullies in our society—not the punks beating kids up for milk money on the way to school, no, they’re bad all right, but we mean the bullies we grownups have to contend with routinely—the ones who wield just enough authority that applying it abusively amplifies their personal sense of importance. You run into them whenever you deal with a government operated bureaucracy. Even if you are poor, a minority, and live in government subsidized housing, you still run into these bullies because they are not respecters of persons—in fact, if you are a poor member of a minority population you probably run into them a lot more often because you have to spend a lot more time at social services. They inhabit Social Services offices, MVA buildings, and virtually every other government bureaucracy…they are the ones who tell you to go to the other line because the little dictator in the first line gave you the wrong color form, which turns out to be the right color and you are sent back to the back of the line you waited in for an hour to be told you had the wrong color form, which was wrong. You know how it goes. And now that we have Obamanomics and Obamacare we are going to see this species of bully multiply like fruit flies.  But who is an even nastier bully–and one that most Americans have had some degree of unwanted interaction with?

Standard MVA-style apparatchik, now assured of permanent employment!

Standard MVA-style apparatchik, now assured of permanent employment!

IRS officials looking for possible ear infection. Now they get your medical files!

IRS officials looking for possible ear infection. Now they get your medical files!

Yes, the Internal Revenue Service, gentle readers, that’s who. And The Internal Revenue Service is now in charge of your health care. That’s right—whether you live or die is up to the tax man. The good folks who pounced on Benjamin Carson, who attempted to ruin the beautiful and talented Michele Bachmann, who successfully blunted any attempt by Tea-Party groups to participate as non-profit organizations in the 2012 presidential election, and who cheerfully conspired with the Federal Elections Commission to stymie conservative fundraising efforts in the recent election year, are now in complete control of your health care, and will shortly be in complete possession of your medical history. Meanwhile, the NSA will have a file of every Internet or cell phone calpt_1886_3861_ol you ever made waiting quiescently. They may never need to examine that file, but then again, it might come in handy if you get out of line—like what if you’re a Supreme Court Justice about to declare Obamacare unconstitutional? But even this kind of bullying isn’t the scariest. It’s just the most inevitable at this point.


Scarier is that a 15 year old kid named Benji Backer is bullied mercilessly by faculty members at Appleton North High School because he stands up for conservative values. (The School District is investigating his claims, ahem, ahem.)The savage rantings of Michigan State University Professor William S. Penn would have remained mere rumor had campus conservatives not managed to tape one of his outbursts. His assertion that “Republicans have raped” the country and are working to keep minorities from voting are two of his tamer allegations. His blanket denunciation of senior citizens is available on you tube. Professor Penn, by the way, was supposed to be teaching English.


Backer is caught on film engaged in activities that clearly required severe reprimands from his concerned high-school teachers.

On the subject of scientific inquiry into the hypothesis of global warming, Kari Norgaard, a sociology and environmental studies professor at Oregon University, recently contributed her view that anyone who doesn’t believe that global warming is real and results from human technology is “sick” and needs to “be treated.” She went on to compare global warming skepticism to racism and reiterated that “cultural resistance” to man-made global warming is “sick,” and “must be recognized and treated!” She stopped short of insisting on electroshock. This is reminiscent of Al Gore’s insipid comment that the “debate is over” on the global warming issue, because of “consensus,” which is as distal from the standards of scientific inquiry as Harry Reid’s recent remark to Speaker Boehner that “there’s no need for conversations” is distal from the parliamentary ethos.

Kari Norgard, quick to recognize her scientific opponents as sick, not evil!

Kari Norgard, charitable enough to recognize her scientific opponents are merely sick, not truly evil!

Professor Darry Sragow of the University of Southern California was also secretly taped by a student during one of his typical harangues during which he called Republicans old, white, racist, and losers. He went on to recommend ways that his students could illegally suppress voting by known Republicans. “You lose their information on the election in the mail,” he told an enquiring student, adding “I mean there is lots of ways you can do it.” (Clearly Professor Sragow does not teach English. Rather, his billingsgate is what passes for Poli Sci at USC.) One can, by the way, visit such invaluable cites as Campus Reform [just click here}for endless examples of this type of proctoral sedition, thus WOOF will permit you, gentle readers, to sample further instances of university-level bullying as your capacity to endure the repugnant may allow.


Professor Darry Sragow offers a few tips on voter suppression as part of his poli-sci course at USC.

So are the bastions of Ivy League liberal arts education taking heed of this lunacy within their hallowed halls? Apparently so!  One clear bit of evidence that the recurrent accusations not only of liberal bias, but of ranting, seething liberal bullying, were beginning to give the doyens of higher education pause came in the form of  a statement from Jonathan Cole, the former provost of Columbia University, who rose to the occasion a few years ago and exclaimed that, “A rising tide of anti-intellectualism and intolerance of university research and teaching that offends ideologues….is putting academic freedom – one of the core values of the university – under more sustained and subtle attack than at any time since the dark days of McCarthyism.”  Uh-ohhh!  You know they’re scared when they bring Joe’s name into it, Woofketeers. It’s Progressive-speak for “boogah- boogah!” And do we correctly understand from Cole’s complaint, that objecting to academic bullying is now McCarthyism?  This is also historically silly since Joe never harassed university professors, who were typically targeted by the House UnAmerican Activities Committee of which Joe was no part, but with which liberals obsessively conflate him. The only professor famously accused by McCarthy was Owen Lattimore, and Owen Lattimore was a communist. In fact, McCarthy once remarked that one should practice forbearance in assessing the loyalty of college professors, “because a lot of them are just nutty.” Next case?

"Say Roy, we have another 40 minutes before lunch--let's drag a bunch of them--whatcha call? College professor pinkos in here and ruin their lives, whata ya say?:

“Say Roy, we have another 40 minutes before lunch–let’s drag a bunch of them–whatcha call? College professor pinko guys in here and ruin their lives, whata ya say?”

You and especially your children are being groomed to live in the wonderful new “fundamentally transformed” America– transformed fundamentally into a socialist state. And the only way redistribution of property can be enforced in such a state is by bullies. Obama and his controllers are remaking us into the kind of country in which educationists harangue you until you vote radical leftist, despise Christians and wear your American citizenship as a badge of shame, and accept the sophistical tenets of socialism unquestioningly. Most college students (in case you haven’t noticed) already do! This will bring to fruition the kind of land in which malignant narcissists like Nannie Bloomberg decide how much soda can be ingested by the adult citizens of New York, and assign nurses to berate new mothers caught bottle nursing their babies in hospitals, even as our First Lady insists that school officials ransack children’s lunches for evidence of sufficient broccoli and tofu. You and your children are being conditioned to live in a craven new feudalism of limits, sanctions, and imagesrusmorerestrictions. Coal will be eliminated, nuclear power will be declared too dicey to retain on line, and your automobile will be targeted for extinction (you must learn to use mass transit, comrades)!  You are getting a taste of the Bullyocracy as the Regime cherry picks which services to curtail during the President’s “government shutdown”—as war memorials are capriciously closed to veterans and public parks are surrounded by frowning police officers. Orange cones obstruct highways so that Mount Rushmore is not viewable by the public (which sounds like a Billy Wilder comedy, but it’s happening for real).  Initially, the President ordered the Amber Alert system closed to show the folks how heartless Republicans were in not accepting his total budgetary demands—but when enough of us called foul, he discovered the funds necessary to reopen it. Death benefits for the families of fallen soldiers were also targeted for elimination during the “crisis,.” but have been restored thanks to private donors! All this is mere rehearsal. Soon your thermostat will be “smart,” and how warm you are in winter or how air-conditioned you are permitted to be in summer will be decided by some faceless apparatchik, not by your personal tastes and the size of your dirty capitalistic wallet.

The style of government we have twice elected to encumber ourselves with requires only two classes, roughly, the bullied and the bullies. Right now, the most conspicuous and the most proximal phalanx of bullies is in our schools and colleges. They are not knife-wielding kids in DA hairstyles driving hot rods, oh no! They are the paunchy, balding, but-pony tailed Marxists driving Mercedes sedans and Volvos who are joined in a conspiracy to make our children into tomorrow’s nomeklatura or zeks.  Those of us who wish our children to reject both labels and seize instead upon the high ground of patriotism and liberty will have to expose these propagandists; Fortunately, our kids are showing us how: tape them! Use the Internet to make their travesties manifest. Find out where the small pockets of conservative resistance are located on campuses and conspire with them, advise them, fund them if you’re able! Confront the tenured Castro-ites in their offices and lounges, join the counterrevolution. Video tape your school’s Common Core orientation and place the re-educationists on record! Remember, (ahem) Thomas Jefferson once shot a man on the White House lawn for treason; so only minimal courage is requisite to peaceably calling these trolls out intellectually in their sanctums of febrile perfidy!  We can change academe and return the liberal arts to the study of classics, art, music, and literature. We can challenge academe and return poli-sci to fair-handed inquiries into the intricacies of political theory and its origins. We can prevail upon English teachers to teach syntax and mathematicians to teach calculus—why, we can even persuade history teachers to teach history if we put our minds to it! And we can do it non-violently in the very arenas they inhabit.

Untitlednomen zek

In the true socialist state, only two classes need apply. The class on the left, by the way, is the class that does NOT have to get Obamacare.

So if you want to campaign against bullying this October, locate the real bullies—you have a target rich environment!  Check in at your University or your kid’s University and tell the silver pony tail brigade that you aren’t impressed, and let the petty bureaucrats know that you have limited patience with studied insipidity. And when you have a moment, consider imparting the ancient wisdom of the American race to your kids, many of who are authentically harassed by schoolyard punks. Sure, go ahead and complain to the educationists. By all means, discuss matters with the problem child’s parents, and if you like, offer some suggestions on walking away or talking things out—but while you’re at it, take the time to teach them what Kenny Rogers figured out all the way back in the 1970s:  “Sometimes you gotta fight when you’re a man.”

Oh, and Kenny didn't mention girls, but WOOF firmly believes that ladies can do their part top prevent bullying too!

Oh, and Kenny didn’t mention girls, did he!  But WOOF firmly believes that ladies can do their part to prevent bullying too! 

“Why would I want to do that?” Or how an unguarded moment from the Senate Majority Reptilian put pediatric cancer in the spotlight

In Let's call the whole thing off forum on October 4, 2013 at 8:44 pm
"But things have come a long way since your dad was ill, Jimmy! Today we have wonder drugs--like Vicodin!"

“But things have come a long way since your dad was ill, Jimmy! Today we have wonder drugs–like Vicodin!”

What do you do with a problem like Harry?

What’s up with Harry Reid? As even his own staff admits off the record, he is a venomously mephitic little churl who holds voters in thinly disguised contempt, and never plumbed a depth to which he was not prepared to stoop in the manufacture of political billingsgate or accusatory simpering. Like, remember the time he took to the floor gushing shock and dismay at Rush Limbaugh’s unforgivable slander of our men and women in uniform? Recall that time? Limbaugh was exasperated, as were many radio talk hosts, by “seminar callers” who got through call screeners by claiming to be serving members of the military. Once on the air they would begin (reading) lengthy denunciations of the war and the military and the Bush administration, but seemed uniformly (excuse the pun) incapable of identifying their units, MOS’s, or even, in many cases, their precise branches of service. An infamous example is Jesse Macbeth, a war critic who falsely but widely claimed to be an Iraq veteran and an Army ranger. In exasperation, on September 28, 2007, Limbaugh referred to such poseurs as “phony soldiers.” Reid took the remark out of context and staged a carefully rehearsed hissy fit, complete with his trademark sniveling conflated with quavering nasalities, all somehow intended to connote moral outrage—an emotion to which Harry Reid has never been authentically subject. Not once.


Of course, if you followed that dust up, you will also remember that Reid, thinking himself on a roll, penned a letter to Mark P. Mays, president of Clear Channel, the parent company of Limbaugh’s broadcasting operation. In his letter, Reid demanded that Limbaugh apologize to the men and women of America’s armed forces, and, preferably, be relieved of his broadcasting duties given the embarrassment he had ostensibly visited upon Clear Channel’s good name. Besides Reid, 40 other Democrats who were either stupid enough to believe that Limbaugh had insulted America’s armed forces, or craven enough to agree to pretend that he had, appended their signatures. These included Hillary Clinton and then-Senator Barack Obama. Mays, citing Limbaugh’s longstanding reputation for unyielding support of our nation’s military men and women, and his enormous popularity with our troops overseas, thanked Reid for his letter, and handed it over to Limbaugh who auctioned it off on eBay, announcing on his program that he would match whatever sum the letter brought, and donate the entire sum to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, a nonprofit that gives scholarship assistance to children of Marines killed in the line of duty. In front of his 20-million-strong audience, Limbaugh then invited Harry Reid to do likewise.

phoney soldiers

Limbaugh’s ‘phony soldier’ remark was never intended for serving members of the armed forces. Here, for example, a typical seminar caller prepares to foist himself off as Army General Wesley Clark.

The accidental philanthropist…

The letter went for 2.1 million, which Limbaugh matched as promised, donating the 4.2 million to the predetermined charity. Reid did not donate a dime, but took to the Senate floor again, purring like a kitten. He announced that he was pleased that a letter signed by himself and some colleagues could bring so much money for “such a good cause.” He said he would have gotten every member of the senate to sign it “but we didn’t have time,” and concluded that “I don’t know what we could do more important than helping to ensure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education.”  “We?” Gosh—anyone might have thought Harry planned the whole moronic kerfuffle with charity in mind. Him and his buddy Rush, right? That’s Harry Reid in one lesson. And for whatever reason, the good people of Nevada re-elected this jackanapes in 2010, but we digress.


Always pleased to help Rush out with a worthy cause!

The Accidental reporter….

Reid is most lately in the news for steadfastly refusing to allow the Senate to give consideration to any bill sent over from the House that might partially or wholly finance various operations of government, but leave Obamacare unsubsidized. Reid and President Obama have firmly stated that no financing of anything will be permitted unless Obamacare is fully funded and operationalized as planned (except, one supposes, for those parts that President Obama has magically suspended in imperious confutation of the Constitution). The idea is simple: Either Harry and Barrack get 100% of what they want, or they won’t allow a funding bill to survive the Senate. Meanwhile, they will point at the chaos this engenders and declare, “Look at what those terrible Republicans have done!” And the lapdog media will cry out as a chorus, “Yes, and it’s all true, too!” And so it has been going for days now.

Dana Bash, an accidental outburst of journalism and Reid called her "irresponsible and reckless!"

CNN’s Dana Bash, an accidental outburst of journalism and Reid called her “irresponsible and reckless!”

But on Wednesday, Dana Bash of CNN pointed out that the GOP had proposed a no-strings-attached bill to fund the National Institute of Health. Bash observed that kids were being turned away from desperately needed cancer treatments and asked Reid if he was not inclined to allow the bill to pass the senate. Reid testily rejoined, “Listen, Senator Durbin explained that very well, and he did it here, did it on the floor earlier, as did Senator Schumer. What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded? It’s obvious what’s going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible. Wow. What this is all about is Obamacare. They are obsessed. I don’t know what other word I can use. They’re obsessed with this Obamacare. It’s working now and it will continue to work and people will love it more than they do now by far. So they have no right to pick and choose.” But Miss Bash persisted, asking Reid, “But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?” And Harry Reid, in one of those epiphanic moments of unguarded selfness replied, or rather seemed to ask rhetorically, “Why would I want to do that?” And then, sensible perhaps of having revealed too much, added, “I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force Base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own.” And suddenly conscious of having said entirely too much, he went for the counterattack, turning on Dana Bash with, “This is—to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless!” Yeah, Harry—people like Bash ought to keep their mouths shut, huh!


Higgins was for cancer funding before he voted against it!

With friends like these…

Thursday, while the Liberal Establishment Media spent the morning explaining to one another that Dear Harry had simply fallen prey to a lapsus lingua that belied his legendary heart of gold, the House made another stab at funding cancer treatment for kids. This time, in fact, 35 House Democrats broke ranks and voted for the bill too. But by no means all of them!  Congressman Brian Higgins, (D-NY) moaned that “The Tea Party shutdown will deny 200 patients a week—30 of them kids—treatment at the largest research hospital in the world, the National Institutes of Health,” adding, “These are often last chance cancer treatments that offer the only hope for kids who are stuck with cancer.” Having thus claimed the sympathies of one and all, and painted the bizarre picture of Tea Party activists somehow obstructing kids from receiving cancer treatment, Higgins proceeded to vote against funding the NIH. Did he not hear himself?

Sheila Jackson Lee--might have left her vote for NIH on mars, with Neil's flag?

Sheila Jackson Lee–might have left her vote for NIH on mars, with Neil’s flag?

Then came Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-TX), who famously if belatedly resurrected South Vietnam, explaining from the floor of the House in 2010 that it had learned to live in peace with North Vietnam despite their differences, and perhaps most famous for asking a NASA spokesperson whether the Mars Pathfinder could get a photo of the flag she thought Neil Armstrong  planted on the Martian surface in 1969.  Lee is at least a well-known supporter of pediatric cancer research. She underscored this fact by rising to declare that, “Every 36 minutes a child is diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. That’s enough children to fill a classroom each day, which adds up to almost 15,000 new cases of childhood cancer each year. Today, more than 90% of 13,500 children and adolescents diagnosed with cancer each year in the United States are cured because of the work of researchers like those working at NIH.” Lee then voted against funding the NIH.

Maryland's perennial munchkin menshevik lauds the importance of cancer research, votes against funding it!

Maryland’s perennial menshevik munchkin lauds the importance of cancer research, votes against funding it!

When the bill made its way to the Senate there was an equal outcry of compassion for the nation’s cancer-stricken youth. “The House is sending us bills which on first blush seem attractive,” said Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D.-MD.). “I mean, who doesn’t support our National Guard? Who doesn’t want to fund NIH? I certainly do. NIH is located in my State. I am so proud of the men and women who work there.” She then declared that she would not vote to fund NIH unless the House agreed to fund every other program that President Obama wanted funded.  Dick Durbin spoke next. “I have said it before, but it bears repeating,” said the Senate Majority Whimp, who has never in his life said anything that bore repeating, “Two hundred people were turned away from the National Institutes of Health this week who wanted to enter clinical trials because of a serious life-threatening illness, including 30 children—cancer patients coming to the NIH with their parents for one last hopeful move to save their lives.” – -And having so spoken, Durbin set about his duty as Whip making sure none of his fellow Democrats intended to lift a finger to help those kids by doing anything so out of lock-step with the Democratic majority as voting to fund the NIH.

The Cancer wars

Is this simply a presidential hissy fit, and a bunch of senatorial kabuki dancers mincing supportively? Fully two decades have swept by without the 1BarackObama-Crybaby1-300x289development of any new drugs specifically targeted against pediatric cancers. A recent Institute of Medicine report revealed that better than half the drugs currently used to battle pediatric cancer are more than 25 years old. This is partially explainable in terms of market size, since the number of children with pediatric cancer is small by comparison to other varieties of the disease, and the payoff of for pharmacology is therefore less alluring. The pediatric drug shortage crisis is ongoing And the left-wing narrative of evil capitalists willing to sacrifice children on the alter of mammon would fit nicely here, if there weren’t another and rather more curious wrinkle involved. Dr. Peter Adamson, Chair of the Children’s Oncology Group, called last year upon policymakers to expedite a bill addressing the shortage of drugs for the treatment of kids with cancer, telling reporters, “If we can induce remission in children with leukemia in four weeks, I would challenge our colleagues in Washington to enact legislation in four weeks’ time.” But Washington does not perceive much urgency in this arena. Seemingly, Senator Reid is not alone in his apparent insouciance to the crisis.

Sarah%20Palin%20GunsIt might be fun, were this a Republican administration, to cry out that heartless budget cutting conservatives had so deprived the medical field of needful funds (in order to build death rays and nuclear-powered super stealth bombers and stuff), that nothing had trickled down to the afflicted waifs, alas and alack. And were it possible to sound plausible ascribing this injustice to “W” even now, MSNBC would happily lay such cruel parsimony at the feet of a skinflint executive branch, and a scattering of mad-dog right-wing axe wielders in Congress. But no– we have the socialist democrats in power currently, and they are the party of illimitable redistributive generosity, so why does pediatric cancer seem singled out for neglect? Long before the leftist pols were taking turns at the congressional microphones conjuring lurid images of insensate Tea Partiers gunning down fleeing oncologists in the hallways of NIH with their horrible AR-15s, it was looking sparse for pediatric cancer research in America. Why, one feels justified in asking, will a party of Marxian redistributionists who think nothing of chunking 50 billion dollars into the big burn basket marked “green energy initiatives” lift not a finger to help a ten year old kid with leukemia? Could it be…Bush’s fault?

Caroline Pryce-Walker, girl interrupted

RepresentativePryce and her daughter.

Representative Pryce and her daughter.

Caroline Pryce Walker died of Neuroblastoma in 1999, and her mother, Deborah Pryce, then a Republican Congresswoman from Ohio,was aghast at how few advances and how few funds were arrayed against pediatric cancer, the insidious number one medical killer of our nation’s young. She determined to do something about the problem and sponsored the Caroline Pryce Walker Childhood Cancer Act in her daughter’s memory. The bill called for the continuance, enhancement, expansion and intensification of pediatric cancer research, and the creation of new, effective treatments as well as preclinical tests, pediatric clinical trials and authorized award grants to childhood-cancer researchers as well as to direct service organizations for the expansion of activities ensuring early access to the best available therapies and clinical trials for pediatric cancer patients.  Additionally, the Act authorized the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to award grants to enhance and expand existing infrastructure to track the epidemiology of pediatric cancer and establish a comprehensive nationwide registry of pediatric cancer cases. So how wonderful is that?

"W" signs the act,, October 4, 2013.

“W” signs the Childhood Cancer Act, October 4, 2013.

The act was signed into law by George “W” Bush on July 29, 2008.  But rather like that fence that congress voted to build to secure our border with Mexico, it just never happened. Where did it go? It was never funded. Moreover, amid the most stupendously giddy outlay of stimulus spending in the history the planet, President Obama’s 831 billion dollar American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, it remained unfunded.  How come? Millions of investment dollars went to Bill Ayers’s pet project, Common Core, so we could destroy our schools; millions more ,untitledto green energy programs like Solyndra so that they could go bankrupt. Eighty million went to keep the National Education Association happily radicalized, and the amount is undisclosed that went to Gay groups like San Francisco’s “CounterPULSE” which advertises productions like “Perverts Put Out” during which participants are invited to experience the “long running pan-sexual performance series” and “join your fellow pervs for some explicit twisted fun,” yup, they got stimulus money. Millions were sent abroad where we now know the stimulus package helped stimulate such oddities as Finnish car manufacturing, Mexican solar panel production, and the construction of Danish windmills. But the incoming Obama administration just couldn’t quite manage to fund the Caroline Pryce Walker Act—even though it’s law. (An interesting precedent, huh!) So it died on Obama’s watch, without ever seeing a farthing of the 150 million it was scheduled to receive.  Is there something endemically adversarial to pediatric cancer research in the ultra-leftist mindset? Was Harry Reid simply enacting a kind of Joycean epiphany—that literary device that Joyce described as a thing suddenly revealed in all its “whatness” when he spoke with such callous nonchalance about kids with fatal cancers? Surely the answer is no. Surely Our Beloved Helmsman will correct this impression?

If you won’t give us money, how about a ribbon and some lights?

Attorney Jonathan Agin, a cancer parent and an activist for pediatric cancer research who lost his daughter to the disease, wrote to President Obama about his seeming lack of involvement with this issue, but never heard back. In a subsequent article Agin pointed out that just one of the President’s Sub-Saharan vacation junkets costs upwards of 100 million dollars. Agin pointed out that this is more than half the federal budget allotted to the National Cancer Institute (and that being inclusive of all varieties of cancers). Agin also remarked on the president’s laudable expressions of interest in funding programs to end hunger in Africa. He noted that Obama called this a “moral imperative.” Agin used a literary, and somewhat less frenetic version of Clint Eastwood’s empty-chair routine, addressing the absent Obama—asking him “I wonder where you place children in your own country dying of cancer? I would love to share just five minutes of your time to see whether you would agree with me, a father who has lost a four year-old child to cancer, that childhood cancer is a moral imperative for greater action. Seriously, do you agree with this statement?” (The rest was silence.)

Africa greets the Obamas during one of their many junkets--of course, many natives are georgraphically naive, and this sign should not be viewed literally!.

Africa greets the Obamas during one of their many vacation junkets–of course, many West African natives are geographically naive, and this sign should definitely not be taken literally!

Well, Agin never found out if Our Beloved Leader agreed or disagreed, because he never got a call from the enigmatic rover of the vast Sub-Sahara, or anyone on his staff. Others in the pediatric cancer advocacy groups voiced a considerably less ambitious request. September was cancer awareness month, during which the White House lit itself brightly pink not as an exposition of the chief residents political leanings, but rather in support of breast cancer research, which is represented by a pink ribbon. The ribbon for pediatric research is gold, and petitioners earnestly entreated the president to raise consciousness for their stricken children by lighting the White House gold for a night. To this end, a Whitehouse.gov petition was filled out with more than the requisite number of signatures back in 2012, but not a word was spoken from the Oval Office.

A pink White House to raise breast cancer s\awareness? No problem!

A pink White House to raise breast cancer s\awareness? No problem!

It was only this year, in fact last month, that the cancer parents heard anything at all, and this news came not from Our Beloved Leader, but rather his attaché, Comrade Paulette Aniskoff, Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Public Engagement. With regard to lighting the White house gold for a night or two, the answer was no, or more precisely, the answer was: “although we cannot light the building gold….we’re issuing a Presidential Proclamation…” so there you have it. By the way, why can’t they light the building gold? Maybe they can’t afford gold light bulbs because of that mean Senator Cruz?  Miss Aniskoff didn’t bother saying.  Instead she pointed out that back in April, Dear Leader consented to meet for five minutes with 7 year old Jack Hoffman, a brain cancer patient and cancer research advocate. The President might have taken that opportunity to confide in young Mr. Hoffmann that he was appalled to learn that pediatric cancer receives only 4% of the entire budget for cancer research, and that he was upping that (by Presidential directive, of course) to 20 %, beginning at once. But no, he gave Mr. Hoffman, who is a gridiron enthusiast, an autographed football—and do you know whose autograph was on that football, sports enthusiasts? Yup—Barack Hussein Obama’s. Go out for a long one, Barry!

Rappin' Preezy shoots the breezy, but all Jack gets for his trouble is the football. Barack's stash stayed in the wall safe!

Rappin’ Preezy shoots the breezy, but all Jack gets for his trouble is the football. Barack’s stash stayed in the wall safe!

What’s so bad about pediatric cancer?

Hapless Dweeb in charge of persiflage, Paulette

Hapless Dweeb in charge of persiflage, Paulette Aniskoff.

Let’s face it, you don’t have to be a conservative to have enough brains to know that the White House can light itself up bright gold any darn time it wants to; on Obama’s whim, in fact. Miss Aniskoff’s assertion that in “cannot” do so for the child cancer cause is ridiculous—especially given the fact that lighting the executive mansion bright pink for breast cancer awareness was undertaken so alacritously. So do the Maoists in the mansion’s West Wing secretly want kids with cancer to die? Is that how insanely malevolent they’ve grown in power? No, to believe this would be to foolishly disregard Rebecca West’s old lesson about “the banality of evil.” This is the evil and banality exemplified by the stooped wraithlike figure of Harry Reid. It is not seething with malefaction at kids with cancer—of course not.  It does not reveal itself in maniacal cackling or Machiavellian hand rubbing as the doomsday clock expires—nothing of the sort. It simply puts Reid in “high def” for that Joycean moment—a suddenly reified image of the seedy gaming commissioner turned party hack, wondering aloud and apparently to himself why he would want to save some kid with cancer—or how it would fit the day’s itinerary, if at all.

The breast by comparison:

Nobody wants women to die of breast cancer, or to be cheated of the best conceivable talent while in treatment for breast cancer, but there is an object lesson for all of us in the fact that pediatric cancer is left penniless while breast cancer receives the most cancer funding by outlandish margins. Thus, advances are constantly forthcoming, and we are all pleased that they are, but the parents of cancer kids wonder why they can’t acquire the kind of mojo that keeps breast cancers at the forefront of research and funding efforts year after year. They don’t get it. In the plaintive voices of those among the moms who obviously entered into this familial nightmare with faith in Obama, the consternation is especially heart-rending.  Doesn’t he hear us? Doesn’t he understand us? These adorable keepers of the faith are remindful of the Russian peasants who endured the depredations of their inhuman labors and raids by Cossacks all the while while whispering to one another, “If only father Czar knew of our treatment!”

If only Father czar knew...!

If only Father czar knew…!

The answer is political all right, but nobody has it in for our kids, at least not this side of Common Core. Breast cancer is simply a veritable cornucopia of demographic treasures, from soccer moms to call girls to militant feminists to concerned husbands to courageous Hollywood glamour queens who have braved treatment and triumphed, it is the kind of politics that any candidate or elected official wants to be conspicuously associated with. And because the outcomes tend to be positive, one can bask in the aura of victory more often than defeat. Not so with pediatric cancer. The kids make people sad, they perish all too frequently, and the bald kids are not comely props for glittery photo ops–they represent no entree into a single hot progressive demographic…In fact, progressives are rather upset with people for having children at all these days—how selfish!  No, barring a miracle, funding for these most horrendous and heartbreaking cancers will remain minuscule. Those who would like to presume WOOF wrong about this may wish to view the educative Truth 365 video, [available by clicking here.]. It’s paleo-death panels, kids!

"Told ya!"

“Told ya!”

We has been disabled!

So here we have the death panels, in a kind of adumbrated fashion, like fossilized for-bearers of creatures yet to come. Please don’t shriek in disgust and click us to the cornfield on this point, dear readers—think about it for a moment. Some are dying because they lack a substantial voting bloc, nor do they occupy a progressively favored social category. Think we’re extreme? Spending on childhood cancer is actually diminishing each year, and is currently about $26.4 million. As a comparison, consider that NCI funding for AIDS research is nearly 300 million dollars, and breast cancer allotments are topping 600 million per annum.  Somebody, somewhere, is deciding who lives and who dies, isn’t that correct? Maybe without the slightest malice in his heart—but with a definite eye to political practicalities, nonetheless! Fortunately, we have dear Comrade Aniskoff’s letter to the parents of the afflicted children—the one explaining that lighting the White House gold would be too much effort. But she also offered some glad tidings, namely that “the Affordable Care Act offers a number of important benefits for children fighting cancer. For example, eliminating lifetime caps on care means insurance companies can’t set a dollar limit on what they spend on a child’s care. And insurance companies can no longer deny families coverage because their child has a pre-existing condition like cancer. And the law will help millions of Americans, including children, get health insurance so if an accident or illness like cancer happens, they can get the care they need and deserve and are protected from high, unexpected costs. You can learn more about these benefits and more at HealthCare.gov.” Enjoy!

Letssss seee---you say you got trouble breathing, is that right? And just did you say your oarty adffiliation is?  registration again?

Letssss seee—you say you got trouble breathing, is that right? And just  what did you say your party affiliation was again? 

So there’s a ray of hope, gentle readers! While your insurance company (that you got to keep because you wanted to) is going out of business because it cannot possibly afford to offer coverage of your child’s pre-existing illness that costs upwards of  $40,000 a day to treat, while reimbursing you with no dollar limits allowable on these costs in accordance with the new law, your government is standing by to take over as the single payer system it always intended to become (thus saving you from those dastardly capitalists who abandoned you when you needed them most!) All you have to do now is check out the exchanges and place a nitro tab (if you can afford to) under your tongue because you’re going to need it when you see what “affordable health care” costs!  and of course, once you’ve been saved from those money grubbing insurance people you’ll be in the competent and unbiased hands of the IRS–the ones who just tried to mess up Ben Carson’s life with a slue of audits to punish him for embarrassing President Obama at a prayer breakfast–but on the bright side, the IRS will probably put a stop to all their intrusions into the finances of non-Democrats. Why would they bother when they now possess the power to limit your medical treatment or your child’s medical treatment based on your party affiliation?   So, if you happen to have a kid with cancer, your best bet for the time being may be to go to the “We the People” forum at whitehouse.gov and enter a protest—except that you really can’t do that right now, because all you’ll get is what we just got:  A notice reading:

diana shedding“Due to congress’s failure to pass legislation to fund the government, “’We the People’ has been temporarily disabled.” Got that?  Well, it seems like we the people has been temporarily disabled for five years now, if you ask us—and Obamacare turns out to be the solution?  See, Harry Reid isn’t the worst thing about the Age of Obama—he’s just its most conspicuous ambassador– the reptoid alien who forgot to wear his people mask on stage, that’s all. So pretend you haven’t noticed and keep checking those exchanges—once they get them working! That way, maybe they’ll eat you last!WOOF PRINT


OMG, they’re freakin’ lizards!

%d bloggers like this: