Mark Steyn: “More space for Islam means less space for everything else, and in the end less space for you.”

Mark Steyn again cuts to the quick of the matter:

If you didn’t know it before that Valley Park photograph, you should now: “Diversity” is where nations go to die. If local Mennonites or Amish were segregating the sexes and making them enter by different doors for religious services in a Toronto grade-school cafeteria, Canadian feminists would howl them down in outrage. But when Muslims do it they fall as silent as their body-bagged sisters in Kandahar. If you’re wondering how Valley Park’s catchment district got to be 80-90 per cent Muslim is nothing flat, well, Islam is currently the biggest supplier of new Canadians, as it is of new Britons and new Europeans. Not many western statistics agencies keep tabs on religion, but the Vienna Institute of Demography, for example, calculates that by 2050 a majority of Austrians under 15 will be Muslim. 2050 isn’t that far away. It’s as far from today as 2011 is from 1972: The future shows up faster than you think.

A world that becomes more Muslim becomes less everything else: First it’s Jews, already fleeing Malmo in Sweden. Then it’s homosexuals, already under siege from gay-bashing in Amsterdam, “the most tolerant city in Europe”. Then it’s uncovered women, already targeted for rape in Oslo and other Continental cities. And, if you don’t any longer have any Jews or (officially) any gays or (increasingly) uncovered women, there are always just Christians in general, from Egypt to Pakistan.

More space for Islam means less space for everything else, and in the end less space for you.

RTWT and weep for our northern neighbors. Unless the climate of political correctness that cripples this nation is obliterated, then we are not far behind.

My New Obsession


Run by two of my favorite internet friends, Joy and Gerard.

Joy you will remember from CPAC shenanigans. Gerard, well, someday I’ll get to meet him. I really, really hope so.

In the meantime, check out this video, Episode 1 of “In The Red Chair.”

When Kamal Saleem was a boy of 7, he began training in a PLO assault camp. This notorious terrorist group trained him to know his enemy, to hate his enemy, and to anticipate their every move. His singular purpose was to use his power to change the world for Islam. Soon he was a career mercenary, working for the cause of Jihad. But a severe accident broke his back and changed everything in an instant. The one thing that this warrior was not prepared for—was the power of love.

There will be a quiz. When you least expect it.

My Final Word on the Ground Zero Mosque

Gerard says it the best. Posted in full, with his permission, since it is too good to excerpt (emphasis mine).

Tolerance Does Not Require Approval, August 27, 2010

Central to the ‘progressives’ suicidal rush to condemn the Cross and celebrate the Mosque is their decades long and continuing attempt to equate “tolerance” with “approval.” These two states are not the same thing which is why the English language provides two distinctly different words.

Why does the First Amendment enshrine both speech and religion as things the state shall not legislate against or establish an approved version thereof? To formalize “tolerance” without requiring “approval.”

In this wise, it is possible to form a society of individuals with vastly different ideas and religions in which the liberty of all is respected by all. In essence we agree that I tolerate your worship of a moon god and you tolerate my worship of a tree. It’s “live and let live” at the most basic level. If, on the other hand, you decide that I have to make continuous noises of “approval” of the moon god in order for you to grant me the right to worship the tree god in peace, we are headed towards an argument that ends in guns.

At its most basic the American tradition is that I don’t require approval of my beliefs from you and you don’t insist on my approval of your beliefs. Regardless of what we may do, we tacitly agree not to do things which exacerbate a state of mutual disrespect. We mutually agree not to get in each others faces about these issues with acts like, oh I don’t know, building a temple to the moon god so that it casts a shadow across my cemetery. Doing so starts a process of disrespect that also tends, if history is any guide, to end in guns and fire.

“Toleration does not require approval.” It really is the simplest of social compacts and like all great and simple ideas bringing in nuance and qualifiers doesn’t strengthen our common bonds as society but weakens it. This is well-known to those that seek to create a climate of continual upheaval in the mistaken belief that, in the end, the fire will not consume them. Civil war consumes all.

It is well to reflect that every single move in the past few decades that has resulted in a loss of individual liberty has begun in a plea for tolerance and ended with non-negotiable demands for approval. Those familiar with the decades of the 1840s and the 1850s, the last time the fires in the minds of men grew this hot, will recognize our current conundrum as mirrored in the various issues that led up to and away from the Missouri Compromise. Many were ready, up until the very last moment, to tolerate slavery. But most were not prepared to step over that line into outright approval. Yet those who began in asking for tolerance for slavery ended in demanding approval. As always, it ended in guns and the sweeping away of an old and corrupt institution.

In the spirit of America, I am prepared to tolerate a vast and unfettered range of religions, beliefs, lifestyles, and other things that my fellow citizens may wish to don in order to decorate their lives and souls. But if they come to me and seek my unfettered approval for this or that hobby-horse they have chosen to ride I shall reserve my approval according to my judgment. Should they then, like piqued children, insist on my approval of this or my disapproval of that as a requirement in custom or in law for my continued full citizenship in this nation, we will find ourselves at daggers drawn.

I show you the American contract enshrined in the Declaration and codified in the Constitution. Like Lincoln, I show you a land “conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are equal.” Like Whitman, I give you “the sign of democracy.”

From these founding principles, forged and tested in fire, we have built a land in which we — difficult as it may be — agree to “tolerate” each other. I do not require, nor do I seek to compel, your “approval.” Beware if you seek to compel mine.

The Real Goal of the Ground Zero Mosque

If this didn’t make you mad enough to spit, then read all of Christine Brim’s post at BigPeace and learn about the Shariah Index Project. That’s ok, I’ll wait.

The issues at stake in the Ground Zero Mosque and the Shariah Index Project are not about Americans supporting the Constitution’s protection of religious freedom. Americans support that protection.

The issues at stake here are about Americans protecting the Constitution from Shariah-adherent groups using the protective guise of religious freedom to attack the Constitution itself – using a triumphal Ground Zero mosque as “the base” for a project to institutionalize Shariah in America.

And King Bozo was for it before he was against it.

Any questions? Let US be clear here, Mr. President, November is coming.

(Many thanks to Larwyn, without whom the internetz would stop spinning.)

He Was For The Mosque Before He Was Against It

Title and cartoon swiped from Caught Him With a Corndog. Read the whole thing.

Do We Have An Answer?

Finally? Maybe?

First of all, I take a couple of days to pack up and move my boy off to college and guess what? What always happens when I go out of town? Our Fearless Leader steps in the bigg pile of poo.

Back, oh ’bout a year and half ago, I wondered out loud if there was Lemon Law for Presidents. Elizabeth Scalia, The Anchoress, wondered the same thing

I continue to grapple with the “Is he a closet Muslim?” question. So far, almost everything he said during the pre-election campaign has turned out to be one kind or another of “misspeak” that is corrected and recorrected in the post-election campaign. Today’s actions lead further down one path.

Is Barack Obama secretly a Muslim or – if not a Muslim – somehow beholden to Muslim interests? I don’t know. Still can’t say. But it’s a fair question, now.

My, how far we’ve come since then. But question remained unanswered, at least officially as America staggered through each of his disastrous new policies. Remember when, on March 6, 2007, in a New York Times article,

Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

Remember the media scrambling to spin this quote from the then candidate as something that shouldn’t cause of smidge of worry for America? Remember?

Erick Erickson asked it again back in January – who is this man? If he’d ever gone to Sunday School, he’d have learned that “words, once out of your mouth, can never be taken back.” Words like those endorsing the location and building of the Cordoba House Victory Mosque at Ground Zero. Then when he feels the breeze of the predicable blow-back, he predictably flip-flops.

Erick said it best again, on Saturday (too good to excerpt),

Barack Obama last night came out forcefully in favor of the Ground Zero Mosque. He said he believed our nation’s founding principles demanded it.


Which of those founding principles? This man was a law professor. Surely he understands that our founding principles do not compel the President of the United States to support the specific act of an individual based on our founding principles. Otherwise, he no doubt supports revolution because that is the principle on which our republic began, see e.g. the Declaration of Independence.

There is, in fact, a difference between the exertion of a legal right and supporting the use of a legal right that is offensive.

Under Barack Obama’s logic, the President of the United States now supports jihad apparently. After all, jihad is an Islamic teaching and our founding principles of freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof must compel Obama’s support for jihad.

Likewise, all those religious sects still practicing polygamy can go to town. After all, there is a more solid historic foundation for polygamy than gay marriage and if we can have one, surely our founding principles now compel we have the other.

Oh — what about the Greater First Church of Satan wanting to do human sacrifice of a willing victim? I guess our founding principles demand the President support that too. After all, it is a religious belief and only willing participants.

No doubt Barack Obama will now also forcefully come out in favor of protesting abortion clinics. After all, our founding principles support freedom of speech.

Just don’t hint at opposing Barack Obama. Our very founding principle — the right of a free people to choose their own leader — makes you a fringe, anti-American racist.

The logic Barack Obama is using to support the noxious notion that a mosque should be built at Ground Zero opens up all sorts of logical avenues our Genius in Chief probably never even thought about.

Lastly, I guess his new found appreciation for our founding principles came after the National Day of Prayer. To paraphrase Keder on Twitter, the left believes putting a mosque at Ground Zero is awesome, as long as Christians are not praying in school.

Arguments are heating up on both sides. Just when we think he can’t find another way to divide America, he does it again.

At least we’re closer to the question of which church he’d join. The Mosque at Ground Zero.

UPDATE: Smitty in the comments points to the ultimate answer and Bill Whittle has it. Yeah, it’s long; stop whining. It’s worth it.

We knew it; we just didn’t want to admit it and Bill ties it up in a tidy package.

The Resemblance Is Uncanny

This reminds me of another “Twins Separated at Birth” moment. Via MindNumbedRobot:


And just remember, Kagan is a happy, happy girl when it comes to sharia law. She has worked for years to “mainstream” it in America. What could go wrong?


Read the whole thing over at WyBlog.

Fausta has a great round-up. Pat and Jill both weigh in on the coward that is the mayor of NYC.

What Mayor Bloomberg doesn’t realize, is HE will be the first one they come for. Because the Muslims believe they conquered him, personally, as well.


Previously: Gauntlet


Pam was there when the NYC dhimmis caved.

President Obama? Did he stand up the greatest insult on American soil to innocent lives lost with the fortitude of an enraged national leader? Well, he was … mmm… present.

I Think I’ll Change the Glossary to a Lexicon

Ya know, the Senator has a Bulldawg lexicon. Which is TEH awesome.

Back in the beginnings of this little blog, I started a glossary, which I have sadly neglected. Lack of focus problems, and all that.

After reading this, I’ve decided to resurrect the little glossary and transform it into a lexicon. After all, this is great stuff. Jill will get the entry for “Sharia Creep,” as in the slow decay of God-given liberties, not that jerk that lives down the street.

And don’t call me Shirley.

Attention Candidates, Sign This Petition to Show Us You Are Serious About Protecing America

Wouldn’t you like to see every GOP candidate sign a pledge agreeing to uphold and defend “a nation free of Shariah?” has published a 10-point platform of fundamental national security principles and is asking public officials and candidates to sign.

Go here for the rest.

HillBuzz Strikes Again, Phyllis Can Take of Herself and a Switcheroo

The adorable boys over at HillBuzz have struck again – this time with their Class vs. Crass series.

They, too, have picked up on “the Prez is such an awesome stud-muffin” meme as well. I’ve always said, if you’ve got to go out of your way to convince people about certain somthings, you’re over-compensating for something else.

The current president is as heterosexual as Tom Cruise and John Travolta.

…Why does the White House feel the need to put out stories about the president being a randy stud — who loves women?

It’s a giant mystery.

The only thing we can think of is that David Axelrod is trying to put the image of a virile, womanizing Obama out there ahead of a himbo eruption …

Maybe that’s why he nominates someone for SCOTUS that he can look macho standing beside in the Rose Garden. There ya go!

Comedy gold…

Phyllis Chester is being attacked by Rachel Tabachnick (who?) on Forward (what?). Stacy’s done the heavy-lifting on this one:

Chesler further suggests that the Forward’s aim in publishing Mrs. Tabachnick is to “rile your audience up against right wing Christians so they will forget all about Islamist hatred of infidels.”

Smoke and mirrors; straight out of the Alinsky handbook. I’ll put my money on Phyllis.

Tom Price has changed his endorsement in the Georgia governor’s race to Karen Handel. Previously, he’d endorsed Capitol buddy, Nathan Deal, who lost a bit of his luster, so to speak.

Depends on their definition of “Extraordinary”

The alarm radio was blaring. Blearily, I hit the snooze. Wow. I must have been dreaming – Obama awarded the Nobel Peace Prize?

Not I wasn’t dreaming. I’m just stunned.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”

Allahpundit is looking around for Rod Sterling.

This makes three times, incidentally, in just seven years that the committee’s turned the Peace Prize into a “**** Bush” award by bestowing it on a liberal American Democrat.

More from the committee:

“Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Nobel Committee said. “In the past year Obama has been a key person for important initiatives in the U.N. for nuclear disarmament and to set a completely new agenda for the Muslim world and East-West relations.” [Emphasis Admin]

At least they got that last part right. But is it an agenda that includes an intact and powerful America in the future? The committee’s water cooler must have been spiked with HopeNChange Kool-Aid.

The Memeorandom thread is here. Updates throughout the day as the story unfolds…

UPDATE I: Opinions:
Dan Reihl (who, by the way, will be on BBC Live today at 11:30 EST on World Have Your Say)
Legal Insurrection
Belmont Club
Mickey Klaus

Pundit and Pundette sums up nicely

So he’s getting it for his pro-Islamic rhetoric, his adolescent no-nukes mentality, his denigration of the US, and his infatuation with the UN. Oh yeah, and for bringing us all “hope.”

And he’s viewed as a narcissistic leader who is weak and vain enough to let his foreign policy be influenced by the ego-stroke of the award. I’m afraid they’ve got his number. This will only puff him up and encourage his president-of-the-world ambitions further.

UPDATE II: More Opinions:
Pat in Shreveport
Jules Crittenden
Michelle Malkin
Ed Morrissey
Ace of Spades
Gateway Pundit

UPDATE III: Even More Opinions:
Yuval Levin
Glenn Reynolds
Times of London – “Mockery”
Jimmie Bise (put liquids aside)
Ed Morrissey, #2

Benjamin Kerstein/The New Ledger on what, exactly…

Obama, by contrast, has precisely two concrete accomplishments to his credit: letting the military do its job with a handful of Somali pirates, and pumping enormous amounts of money into the American economy, thus far with inconclusive results. At best, the jury is still out on everything else he has attempted. On the issues that tend to interest the Nobel committee, this particularly apparent. His engagement of the Iranians has lead nowhere; his efforts toward peace in the Middle East have proved an embarrassing failure; his pledge to reverse Bush-era security policies and close Guantanamo Bay has been, ironically, reversed; the withdrawal from Iraq is precarious; he has snubbed fellow peace prize-winner the Dalai Lama; in regard to Darfur, North Korea, Pakistan, and other trouble spots, he has done nothing; he has made no decision whatsoever in regard to Afghanistan, and will most likely pursue not peace but an escalated war; and his relationship to European leaders is already deeply strained, to the point that the president of France, of all places, has criticized him for being too soft on the Iranian issue. Given all this, it is difficult to conclude that the Nobel committee’s decision is anything other than the final nail in the coffin of Obamamania, a “we’re bigger than Jesus” moment scripted like the final scene from Duck Soup, with the committee and all who sail in her replacing the “Hail Freedonia!”-singing matron being pelted with mud by the Marx Brothers.

UPDATE IV: Even More, More Opinions:
Robert Stacy McCain
Steve Eggleston
Dr. Dave
Dr. Melissa
Donald Douglas
Scott Ott
Rick Moran
BuzzFeed (h/t VodkaPundit – Hope you feel better!)


“You gotta admire that Brad Woodhouse. Even circus contortionists stare at him with their mouths wide open.”

UPDATE V: Paco has the committee transcript. Really.
Ron Radosh – will Ayers write the acceptance speech?
Bookworm Room has more updates than me.

Presidential Ice Cream Order – No Green Sprinkles Please

Sorry so quiet – fighting the usual brutal-humidity-and-heat-inflames-chronically-rotten-sinuses-syndrome. At least I don’t have the feverish misery like poor Elizabeth. I just feel like one eye is going to pop out and ants are holding a disco party in my ears.

You don’t have to look very far back in American history to find a President as weak as the current occupant of the Oval Office. His ineptitude continues to boggle the mind. Note Jimmie’s spot-on tweet regarding the Presidential non-Rose Garden love-fest today:

Reading the transcript of today’s press conference, I can not understate how pusillanimous the President was on Iran.

If you can’t stand up for the most basic of human rights, how can anyone expect you to step and speak out against genocide on a national scale by scheming, corrupt, murdering mullahs? Fausta has an excellent three-parter (here, here, here) on how the French President has one pair more than Obama when it comes to stopping sharia creep in its tracks. I bet Sarko doesn’t take sprinkles on his low-fat, low-cal frozen yogurt. He’ll eat the real stuff – fat grams be damned! Because he’s a real man, a real president and as such, sees the REAL DANGER ahead. Double-thumbs up to my girl for connecting the Dots! (Yikes, yet another ice cream pun.)

His Yogurtness is so double-dipped in Chicago thugery, he just doesn’t understand he is now on an international stage and dealing with some pretty evil people. People who would have his boys back home for lunch. Literally. With no dessert. He may think he wants to negotiate with these goons and parcel out pieces of America, but they will trample over him like they do their own people. Andrew McCarthy observes

The fact is that, as a man of the hard Left, Obama is more comfortable with a totalitarian Islamic regime than he would be with a free Iranian society. In this he is no different from his allies like the Congressional Black Caucus and Bill Ayers, who have shown themselves perfectly comfortable with Castro and Chàvez. Indeed, he is the product of a hard-Left tradition that apologized for Stalin and was more comfortable with the Soviets than the anti-Communists (and that, in Soros parlance, saw George Bush as a bigger terrorist than bin Laden).

Because of obvious divergences (inequality for women and non-Muslims, hatred of homosexuals) radical Islam and radical Leftism are commonly mistaken to be incompatible. In fact, they have much more in common than not, especially when it comes to suppression of freedom, intrusiveness in all aspects of life, notions of “social justice,” and their economic programs.

While the fawning media spins and spins the Iranian Protestor Murders into something so fine and frothy he could use it in his next Dipper Dan presser, Stacy is up in DC, asking the right questions about yet ANOTHER Inspector General “retiring.” We a big room with a big white board to map all this out. And Timothy Geithner (Obama’s Treasury appointee with all the tax problems) is smack-dab in the middle of it. Be sure to click over and see the extra special image of Geithner in Volunteer Orange. Rick sees a pattern developing, and honey, it ain’t Fudge Ripple.


Remember how the Iranian protesters adopted a beautiful dark green as their symbol of freedom? During last week’s World Cup qualifier against South Korea, Iranian soccer players wore green armbands. In actions reminiscent of Uday Hussein, now these players have been permanently “retired” from professional play. Hopefully they won’t be tortured (or worse). Prisoners in their own country, they are trapped within closed borders under a murderous regime, along with millions of their countrymen.

Did Obama ask the ice cream scooper to take out all the green sprinkles? Did he order a waffle cone? Will we ever know, what with all the transparency of this administration?

All puns aside, my heart is breaking for Iran and those fighting for liberty. Keep them in your prayers.

Welcome Troglopundit and Daley Gator readers! Pull a chair up to the tailgate and take a look around!

Obama’s 3am Call

(H/T Gateway Pundit) From Dry Bones:

dry bones 3 am

Mr. President… Mr. “Present”… Your demagoguery is showing again, sir. You are silent on the thuggery of Iran’s mullahs while you are busy intimidating Americans appointed to serve and protect our nation. Do you think a strongly-worded memo or another “brilliant” speech will stop these murderers when they are storming the Outer Banks?

As Charles Krauthammer notes, you still don’t get it, Mr. “Present:”

All hangs in the balance. The Khamenei regime is deciding whether to do a Tiananmen. And what side is the Obama administration taking? None. Except for the desire that this “vigorous debate” (press secretary Robert Gibbs’s disgraceful euphemism) over election “irregularities” not stand in the way of U.S.-Iranian engagement on nuclear weapons.

[…] That’s our fundamental interest. And our fundamental values demand that America stand with demonstrators opposing a regime that is the antithesis of all we believe.

And where is our president? Afraid of “meddling.” Afraid to take sides between the head-breaking, women-shackling exporters of terror — and the people in the street yearning to breathe free. This from a president who fancies himself the restorer of America’s moral standing in the world.

But “meddle” he will…with anything or anyone that sheds light on his real agenda – that of destroying the same America that elected him. The self-absorbed tyrant has a plan, a BIG PLAN that was put into motion when he was a mere lad over in his madrassa, learning to tie his little shoes. The “Piven-Cloward Strategy.” (Yes, go read it now). Any sane, normal, corn-fed American’s

…reaction is, “Aw, there could never have been any such wild scheme to bankrupt America in order to lay the groundwork for a socialist revolution.”

Except there was such a scheme. It’s all true. And the foot-soldiers of that socialist revolution were people like Bill Ayers and the founders of ACORN.

The scandal of IG-Gate gets bigger and bigger. A pattern of abuse? Fishy, indeed. And no distraction abroad, or coerced infomercial is going to last long enough for this story to die. Besides Gerald Walpin, there are now two more Inspector Generals whose work you have hampered and tampered with. With a suspicious connection to your bailed-out bud AIG?

Obama is asleep at the wheel. Paralyzed by fear. I said months ago he was in over his head. Even those who previously drank the Koo-Ade are saying, “We Are All Neocons Now” and supporting the protestors.

Ralph Peters on Green Light for a Crackdown, Obama’s Silence Favors the Mullahs:

If we see greater violence in Tehran, the blood of those freedom marchers will be on our president’s hands.

To take it one further, in the midst of it all, now NorK threatens to attack American soil on Independence Day. Will at least this get a rise out of Mr. Cellophane? An enemy attack on his birthplace? Or at least the place he claims is his birthplace? Does the thought of the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands even register?

Hello? Bueller? Bueller? Is this thing on?

« Older entries

%d bloggers like this: