I don't think that word means what they think it means...

How they view the world.

Lord knows, there's not a whole lot of reason to take Chris Matthews seriously. But for giggles, let's look at his claim that the GOP is "Stalin-esque" because of the way Crist and McCain are having a rough time in the primaries. Now, obviously he's not talking about the GOP forcibly starving the Ukraine or anything like that. And presumably, Matthews isn't saying that the GOP has launched a series of show trials in which former party members in good standing are tortured or threatened with the murder of their families into giving false confessions (Crist: "In the Spring of 2009 I received secret payments by the running-dog Obama administration...."). So I gather he means that the GOP is purging discordant voices within the party or some such (that's the gist of the second quote from Matthews in the link above).

But even here, as Matthews dilutes the meaning of Stalin-esque to 9 parts water and 1 part 2% milk, Matthews still comes out a buffoon.

...

It would be Stalin-esque (again in the very watered down sense) if Michael Steele unilaterally booted Crist et al. from the party over the objections of the rank and file. Instead the rank and file are turning on the long anointed establishment candidates. This "purge" is a lot closer to what some romantics call "democracy" than what super-geniuses like Matthews calls "Stalin-esque."

Somewhat related is the EU idea that people have the "Right" to gov paid vacations.
I don't think "Right" means what they think it does.


Funny that people don't have the right to firearms or the right to have the government butt out of their buisness, or the right to say what they want.

But the healthcare is free! Minus those pesky taxes and having your medical choices... well not be free. Oh and if you see a private doctor, well you're out of the system. Sorry.

But it's a right!

Strange Bedfellows.

Strategypage has a peice on the "resurgence" of the old Euro-Left terrorists.

The Soviet Union had provided some support for these groups, but mostly they were sustained by disaffected middle class kids out to change the world. A new generation of disaffected, politically motivated murderers are now signing up. Many Western leftists still see the United States as the enemy of the people, and capitalism as something that must be destroyed at all costs. In an odd confluence, many of these leftists are marching (literally) shoulder to shoulder with Islamic radicals. This despite the fact that the two groups (one anti-religious, and the other very pro one religion) are natural enemies.

More enthusiastic adoption of socialist, and anti-capitalist policies in Western Europe over the last century has led to a high unemployment rate for people coming out of school, and this has made radical politics a more attractive proposition to some. But compared to the poverty and desperation in the Islamic world, the Western terrorists  have a far smaller recruiting pool. But like the Islamic terrorists, the Western groups share the same basic myth. That is, if the world would only unite under a benevolent despotism, everything would be better. Like the Islamic radicals, the Western terrorists find it more comfortable to blame foreigners for their trouble. In this case, the Evil Empire is the United States, and local officials who have "sold out" to those evil Americans.

Some Western governments have gotten behind the anti-American movement, because it's easy to sell to voters, and the object of their scorn is not likely to hit back. But their homegrown radicals are not so civilized. So now Europe has another group of terrorists to worry about. No doubt, they'll find a way of blaming it on the Americans.

Emphasis added.

Life is funny like that.

By pure coincidence I read this bit about Obama's snub of the Poles after the loss of their President, his wife, and much of their senoir government. And by snub I mean he played golf, instead of even making a statement or something like this: "he could have visited the recently erected Victims of Communism memorial in Washington, or at the very least have signed the condolence book at the Polish Embassy. But what did he choose to do instead? Play yet another round of golf..."



Back to Jack M. of Ace of Spades:

Obama's (at best) ambivalence toward our European allies is a national embarrassment. Yes, DVD gift pack to Gordon Brown, I am looking at you. Yes, unwanted bust of Churchill, I am looking at you too. Yes White House gift shop presents for Gordon Brown's kids, I am also giving you an unPresidential "shout-out".

At worst, his passive-aggressive disdain for our traditional allies places Americans and American interests at extreme risk. Yes, scrapped european missile shield, I am looking at you.

And, to be truthful, I think part of my anger stems from the firm belief, if not outright conviction, that had Polish President Lech Kaczynski been a left-wing, anti-American, despot instead of a pro-American, free-market, anti-communist leader, the Mother Duffer (32 rounds in 14 months? really? OK..Tiger) would have moved Heaven and Earth to be there or to have acknowledged the event in some meaningful way.

Could you really see him skipping out on, say, Chavez' state funeral? Of letting it pass without some solemn intonation about the importance of the Chavista revolution? Really? I can't. No matter how many volcanoes erupt along the ring of fire, I have no doubt that Pres. Tiger Obama would have found some way to show his solidarity with that regime.

Of course we have an administration and political class that's more concernted with its own citizens peacefully protesting than it is with Iran getting nuclear weapons.

And that's Fivetens.

About the name

Well...

I think it's time to explain this little inside joke.

The url is fivetensfourtens.blogspot.com/

What does this mean? Well, it's from the internet of course. Specifically the insane DC dictionary.  A bit of lunacy where the ridiculous actions of superheros and supervillians were explained via even more ridiculous text.

Back at University it became synonymous with something being terrible: "That's as many as four tens. And that's terrible."




This was followed up by another entry:

Here the shorthand became fivetens equals too many. And since bees are awful, the progression to fivetensfourtens seemed natural.




So there's the roundabout meaning of the url: It's too many terrible things.

As for the name "Assorted Meanderings", I was too lazy to actually explain the url so picked a name that made some sense.



Yeah.





On an aside, having spelled out numerals for a url name: Awkward.

Edit: I'm also updating my blogroll to include the blogmeets.  So, if I missed you tell me. I know I have.

Currency

"Old" Whiskey

My Grandmother, it should be said, lived through the Depression as an adult, raising children. (She also lived through Prohibition as an adult for that matter) And that, as for most people, was an experience that made a lasting impression on her.

One impression was that you could count on whiskey. It did not go bad. If you wanted, you could drink it. But more importantly you could always spend it. In some ways, it was better than money. It was inflation proof. It did not suffer from devaluation or inflation. There were always people who would trade you for whiskey. They would fix your car, paint your house, doctors would look at your kids, people would sell you food, all for that wonderful commodity-whiskey.

Emphasis in the original.

And "New" Obedience

The past two years have seen a profound change occur in the American system.  Our basic currency is no longer the dollar.  People like Jason Levin understand the nature of our new currency, which is obedience.

Obama Democrats worship central planning.  They have repeatedly expressed the belief that only powerful, maternal government can be trusted to allocate the most essential resources, or manage vital industries.  The free market is a playpen, filled with the stuff that isn’t serious enough to merit direct control by the Mother State.  When a particular toy causes the children of the electorate to scream, it is quickly snatched out of the pen.  The free market can’t even be trusted to deal with airline fees for carry-on luggage… which turned out to be a market response to previous government action.  You are expected to sit quietly and swallow your tears if Mother State chooses to beat you over the head with one of your toys.

...

The Tea Party is the living incarnation of disobedience.  It is driven by the words and deeds of people who refuse to submit.  Its members demand the return of money and power appropriated by an out-of-control federal government.  They won’t allow their lives to be sculpted by the knives and chisels of penalties and subsidies.  They speak out against an ugly reality that President Obama’s supporters don’t like to confront: political control of the economy consists of directives, which require submission, which can only be assured through punishment.  No matter how benevolent the stated goals of such a system might be, there is nothing benevolent about the methods it must use to attain them.

Emphasis in the original.

Engineering Elegance.

Via Tam

Tea Party

Go.

Odds are very good one will be in your area.

Map here.

And when you go, remember that you are not alone, that the media is lying when they try to paint people wanting responsible, limited goverment as radicals, remember to bring a camera.

Have it ready to record anything you see. There are people that say they want to "expose" the Tea Party's true nature... by doing a false-flag op and pretending to be the very racist haters they *know* are there.

Obama and Nukes.

Here's a belated roundup of The President's decision on US nuclear policy.


Frank J. Gaffney

I believe that the most alarming aspect of the Obama denuclearization
program, however, is its explicit renunciation of new U.S. nuclear weapons — an outcome that required the president to overrule his own defense secretary. Even if there were no new START treaty, no further movement on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and no new wooly-headed declaratory policies, the mere fact that the United States will fail to reverse the steady obsolescence of its deterrent — and the atrophying of the skilled workforce needed to sustain it — will ineluctably achieve what is transparently President Obama’s ultimate goal: a world without American nuclear weapons.

As you'll see later there's another nuclear nation taht Obama wants to punish. Hint, it's not Iran.

Steven Green lays it out.

For decades, and especially after the US destroyed its chemical and biological weapons stores in the early 1970s, our policy has been simple: A nuke bomb is a chemical bomb is a biological bomb. We did not discern between WMDs — and we would retaliate with our own WMDs if struck by enemy WMDs.

And since we had no chemical or biological weapons, that meant one thing: We’re coming after you with nukes. Result? No weapon of mass destruction has ever been used against the United States. Pretty cool, that.

We went even further than that to keep the peace, believe it or not. During the Cold War, the Soviets loudly proclaimed they would never be the first to use nuclear weapons. (Although their defense posture, weapons procurement, and doctrine all showed that proclamation to be disingenuous at best.) Moscow then dared us to make the same commitment. And we stayed silent instead.

Result? The Soviets tread more gently than they otherwise might have. Because one treads lightly in a minefield — especially a nuclear one. Never define exactly what enemy action would make you push the button, and you keep the strategic initiative. Important, that.

Roger L. Simon has some more thoughts.

This is indeed astonishing. The President of the United States —
whose most important duty is to protect the citizens of this country —
is publicly abjuring the use of nuclear weapons if we are attacked by
chemical or biological weapons — both of which are known to all of us
as Weapons of Mass Destruction, the dreaded WMDs.

What are we to make of this and the man who is adopting this policy? Does he hate us? Does he hate this country? What would he do if there was, for example, a massive small pox attack on the U.S.? Send in the infantry? Call in the Marines? Try to reason with whoever did it and recommend they negotiate as the fatal disease spreads to millions of people?

Now I detest nuclear weapons as much as the next person, but this approach seems — I hate to repeat myself, but I will — deranged. It also has very little to do with actually reducing nuclear weapons in the world. Again, it seems like the act of an extreme narcissist, someone who wants to parade himself as anti-nuke while ignoring the checks and balances that have, in fact, kept nuclear weapons in their silos for decades.

There's also the grim aspect of Obama freezing all US nuclear weapons development. Without new weapons and new designs the US will eventually lose its nuclear weapons.

But it's not just the US that Obama seeks to punish.

As Roger L. Simon finds out.

The Obama administration is now denying U.S. visas to Israeli scientists who work at that nation’s Dimona nuclear reactor. This startling reversal of traditional policy was reported April 7, 2010, in the Israeli website/newspaper NRG/Maariv (link to the original Hebrew here and to an exclusive Pajamas Media translation here).

This could be yet another flashpoint in the increasingly sensitive relations between the administration, the American Jewish community, and Israel. The revelation in Maariv came only a day before the arrival in New York of Tariq Ramadan — controversial grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al Banna — whose visa was reportedly championed by Secretary of State Clinton. Yesterday as well, new rules disavowing the term “Islamic radicalism” were announced by Secretary of Defense Gates.

Not to mention that Obama is dithering on Iran's nuclear program and is more than willing to let them get the bomb.

So there you have it.

We knew the president was harsher on countries allied with the US (and domestic political rivals) than countries that are anti-US, but it was never this stark.

How's that change working out?

Correction Roger L. Simon has a correction on the Visa issue.