The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Canadian Left-Wing Guy With Fetish for Asian Porn Kills Chinese Student, 23

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 7 Comments

Brian Scott Dickson, 29, had been a top university student who once worked for a foreign-policy think tank, the Atlantic Council of Canada, and was also “involved with Developments in Literacy, a Pakistani aid organisation that raises money for children.” And now Dickson is charged with murder in the death of a Chinese student:

Described by one admirer as a ‘ total horn dog’, Canadian-born Brian Scott Dickson, who according to his father trawled dating sites for Asian women, is charged with the first-degree murder of Qian ‘Necole’ Liu.
The 23-year-old’s semi-naked body was found in her flat near York University in northern Toronto, after her frantic boyfriend was forced to watch [via webcam] 6,000 miles away in Beijing as she struggled with her attacker.

More on the crime from the Globe & Mail:

She was chatting with her boyfriend, Meng Xiaochao, on a webcam at 1 a.m. [April 15], when she let someone she seemed to know into her room. The man tried to hug her, Mr. Meng said, the two struggled and the assailant shut her laptop. In Beijing Thursday, Mr. Meng expressed relief at the arrest.

Posting as “dj_jake_the_snake” on a Canadian online discussion forum, Dickson last year named his favorite porn performers as Charmane Star (Filipino), Nautica Thorn (Hawaiian) and Lily Thai. He also posted messages about drugs like LSD and Ecstasy, and said that he’d voted for a socialist candidate in the Canadian parliamentary election.

A Toronto Sun columnist expressed bafflement at the seeming contradictions of Dickson’s left-wing politics and degenerate lifestyle, but Kathy Shaidle at Five Feet of Fury is much less baffled.

Category: Canada, China, Crime

If De Niro Were A Bigger Hen,
His Name Would Be Penn,
Or He’d Work For CNN

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 12 Comments

by Smitty

De Niro: let us enjoy your movies. Let not your brand be watered down by inane piffle, emphasis mine:

“I think of the possibility of the government being shut down, and I say, ‘How did we get to this point?’” he said, according to Movieline. “I remember it happened years ago. And I just say, ‘How did we ever get to that point?’ Because the people who suffer are the one who have jobs where every week, they’ve gotta make these payments. How did we get there? What is this about? This is crazy. And I know Obama was trying to bridge the gap. His intentions are really good. Maybe some things are not as good as we all would like, but his intentions were right. A lot of these guys, they’re intentions are not even good. They’re just playing the game. And they’re playing with people’s lives.

How can you say that without barfing all over yourself, man? “Well, if he can stand there and emote well, it has to count for something!” Nonsense. You have to look at the results. How is it that we have to remind Robert Flipping De Niro to man up?

christiane amanpour? no way!

I think this was one of De Niro's SNL characters.

De Niro campaigned for Obama in 2008; during one event during the Democratic primary that year, De Niro said:

“I’ve never made a speech like this at a political event before. So what am I doing here? I’m here because finally one person has inspired me. One person has given me hope. One person has made me believe that we can make a change.”

Robert De Niro. Once an icon of American manhood, now just another sad piece of twisted metrosexual wreckage.

Category: Celebrities

STUNNING VIDEO: German Woman Confronts Radical Muslims: ‘Never Again! I Am Ashamed! … Rise Up, Germany!’

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 30 Comments

Eric Dondero obtained and translated this video from Frankfurt, Germany, in which a woman encountered a group of Muslim men who were evidently engaged in hateful anti-Jewish rhetoric. She decided she had to speak out:

“Never again! Never again! I am ashamed that he is allowed to speak here. I feel ashamed! I am German, and I am so sorry that someone like him can stand here and speak like Hitler! I am so ashamed! Where is everybody? Why are people not standing up in this country of ours? Why are you all keeping your mouths shut? Do you want Germany to be like those countries from which they all came? Do you really want that? You have to speak out! . . . Germany, you have to rise! Rise up, Germany!”

Wow. Just freakin’ wow. This encounter apparently was connected to a Muslim rally in Frankfurt called “Islam, the Misunderstood Religion,” which was addressed by a Jamaican-Canadian imam who advocates sharia law, including the stoning of homosexuals. This video has also been posted at Atlas Shrugs, My Pet Jawa and Bare Naked Islam.

UPDATE: Linked at The Underground Conservative, Left Coast Rebel and Da Tech Guy — thanks!

Category: Germany, Islam, Video

Question To Domestic Patriots: What Are You Doing About The Administration’s DISCLOSE Proposal?

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 7 Comments

by Smitty

PowerLine notes von Spakovsky at PJM reporting:

the Obama administration is circulating the draft of an executive order for comments from several government agencies. Titled “Disclosure of Political Spending By Government Contractors,” it represents the Obama administration’s attempt to implement by executive fiat portions of the DISCLOSE Act as to federal contractors. 

On the heels of the infamous Czar signing statement, one wonders What The Folger Shakespeare Library that the Tea Parties are going to do.
It might be in slightly bad taste to stir the pot on Easter, but I hope that those who care about the Constitution and the future of the country are planning to get their protest on for the Fourth of July and the tenth anniversary of 9/11.

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Those defending the Constitution abroad have the utmost confidence in those defending it domestically, IYKWIMAITYD.
The Ruling Class will continue to devour liberty, left unchecked. You know what to do.

Category: Barack Obama

What Interest Rate Would You Charge Yourself for a Loan of Monopoly Money?

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 7 Comments

This is the question posed by the Fed policy of “quantitative easing”:

The Federal Reserve’s experimental effort to spur a recovery by purchasing vast quantities of federal debt has pumped up the stock market, reduced the cost of American exports and allowed companies to borrow money at lower interest rates. . . .
The Fed limited the program to $600 billion under considerable political pressure. While that sounds like a lot of money, the purchases have not even kept pace with the government’s issuance of new debt . . .
The Fed’s decision to buy bonds, known as quantitative easing, emulated Japan’s central bank, which started buying bonds in 2001 to break a deflationary cycle.
The American version worked well at first. From November 2008 to March 2010, the Fed bought more than $1.7 trillion in mortgage and Treasury bonds . . .
As the economy sputtered last summer, Mr. Bernanke indicated in an August speech that the Fed would start a second round of quantitative easing, soon nicknamed QE 2. The initial response was the same: Asset prices rose, interest rates fell, and the dollar declined in value.

So: In the past two-and-a-half years, the Federal Reserve has printed enough currency — just created it out of thin air — to purchase $2.3 trillion in Treasury debt. You can call it “quantitative easing” if you wish, but the proper term is monetizing the debt, using inflation to hide two facts:

  1. The government can’t pay its bills, and
  2. The government also can’t get enough new credit to cover its current obligation if it were forced to rely entirely on loans from (i.e., bond sales to) private investors.

Without this Fed bond-buying policy, the government would be paying higher rates to service its debt, which cost would then result in higher interest rates for everyone. By making the Fed the default consumer for Treasury bonds, then, “quantitative easing” artificially lowers interest rates, which would otherwise rise to reflect the oversupply (or under-demand) for U.S. debt. And the actual cost of this policy is simple: Inflation.

The failure of QE2 to have the as much Keynesian “stimulus” effect as hoped for (this failure being the main topic of the article quoted) is reflective of the fact that, while the Fed can print money, it does not thereby create wealth, and the resulting inflation is a drain on the national economy.

Why is the effect of “quantitative easing” on my mind today? Here’s Peter Suderman of Reason magazine:

The administration is arguing that we shouldn’t worry about a debt crisis because investors are demanding low interest rates in exchange for loaning money to America. The argument is that if investors were actually worried about the long-term U.S. fiscal outlook, they would be expressing that concern by demanding a higher rate of return. Essentially, the administration is arguing that we can safely use interest rates as a warning system.

But wait: If  a rise in interest rates would signal the onset of a debt crisis (i.e., government’s solvency being threatened by a reluctance of private investors to buy bonds), and if “quantitative easing” artificially lowers interest rates, isn’t it possible that QE and QE2 represent efforts to obscure the market signals of U.S. debt problems?

Even with a $2.3 trillion price-tag, the Fed’s inflationary intervention has been a modest monetary Band-Aid on a very large fiscal wound. And if that Band-Aid holding down interest rates should come unglued, as Suderman says, the hemorrhage of a full-blown debt crisis may hit quite suddenly.

Monday’s warning from Standard & Poors about the long-term prospects for U.S. sovereign debt reflects the inherent risks of the game that Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner have been playing with fiscal and monetary policy. Matt Welch points out that the reaction by liberals — from the HuffPo’s R.J. Eskow to the Atlantic‘s James Fallows — was to derogate S&P. (Hat-tip: Instapundit.)

Let them scoff all they want, but the fact remains that these Monopoly-money manipulations cannot continue forever. If the current policy of massive deficit spending continues, the supply of new Treasury debt will eventually outstrip investor demand to the point that these Bernanke-Geithner “quantitative easing” games won’t be able to hide the gap, at which point higher interest rates will be required. What Team Obama is counting on is that either:

A. The day of reckoning can be postponed past Nov. 6, 2012; or
B. If the day of reckoning comes early, they can somehow pin the blame on Republicans.

The prospects of a return to Carter-style “stagflation” are very real, and the denouement may be even uglier than that. The current policy is unsustainable in the long term and the longer it continues, the closer we get to the point when “the long term” becomes tomorrow.

UPDATE: “But how in the world did Mrs. Palin, who is supposed to be so thick, manage to figure all this out so far ahead of the New York Times and all the economists it talked to?”


Category: Budget, Economics

Easter Joe: God Is Crying

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 4 Comments

by Smitty

On Easter, one envisions God crying tears of joy at the completed redemption of creation. Suffering bites. When it produces something as joyous as the victory over sin and death we celebrate at Easter, well, that is the centerpiece of human history, no? Even the Common Era folks confess this, however grudgingly.
A joyous Easter to all.
It doesn’t take much of scan of Satriani’s catalogue to glom onto the fact that he’s a man of deep faith:

Category: Music

The Futility of Class Warfare Rhetoric

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 11 Comments

Graphic: RushLimbaugh.com via Hot Air Pundit

Demonizing the rich may work as politics for Democrats, but the problem is that it fails as policy. One could argue that Americans are undertaxed in general, and that some kind of across-the-board rate increase (or closing of loopholes) is therefore necessary for the purpose of enhancing federal revenue to eliminate the deficit.

When I say “one could argue” this, I don’t actually mean to make such an argument. My belief is that overspending, not undertaxation, is to blame for the deficit. However, if liberals wish to make deficit reduction the putative goal of their argument for raising taxes, they must base that argument on an assertion of general undertaxation and a need for across-the-board increases, rather than attempting to persuade Americans that the rich in particular need to pay more taxes. If the top 25% of earners pay 86% of all federal income taxes, and the bottom 50% of earners provide only 3% of such revenue, how can anyone plausibly claim that the budget deficit is a result of “tax cuts for the rich”? This is especially so because, as the chart above points out, the share of taxes paid by the “rich” actually increased during Bush’s presidency.

Well, they’re liberals — no fair citing facts. Read more

Category: Barack Obama, Budget, Media Bias, Polls, Taxes

My 10-Year-Old Son Needed a Haircut

Posted on | April 24, 2011 | 23 Comments

. . . so his brother gave him a Mohawk:

Category: Family
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin