Uncommon Commentary #70

It's not very often that I agree with the French, but: Vive la différence! Perhaps "revive" would be more apt, for Westerners have lately seemed bent on erasing all distinctions between the sexes, or, failing that, at least creating a pretense that no such distinctions remain. This attitude manifests itself most regrettably in female participation in such sports as rugby, ice hockey, and even boxing, which is considered by many to be too violent even for men. Making pugilists of women seems to me an act more worthy of pagan Rome than of our supposedly enlightened civilization.

Miscellaneous Musing #16

What kind of weird name is "Steny Hoyer?"

Uncommon Commentary #69

Now that warnings about the ominous "end-of-life provision" have resulted in its removal from the Democratic health-care fiasco, I'd say that the opinion of those who issued the warnings has been borne out. I'd also say that the formation of "death panels" or something much like them was (and, really, still is) not just a frightening possibility but an ultimate inevitability, given both the rationing that would be characteristic of ObamaCareless (see the list of domanisms, below) and society's increasing acceptance of euthanasia and of assisted suicide.

Uncommon Commentary #68: You're Entitled to Our Opinion

According to a poll taken at the end of the First 100 Days, the overwhelming majority of Yanks credited the President with openness to differing viewpoints. It would be interesting to see whether people still feel that way, in light of the reactions by Obama and his henchmen to the criticism and concerns, in town-hall meetings and other forums of opinion, over his edict—I mean, proposal—for health-care reform. The Administration and other Democrats have accused those who oppose micro-managing medicine of (whatever is meant by) being “un-American,” of fear- and "evil-mongering," of having a covert agenda, and of telling half-truths and outright lies: in summary, all the things of which those who promote the government takeover of medicine are themselves guilty. Not content with slander and libel, the Oval Office has resorted even to Gestapo tactics, urging Obama's subjects—I mean, fellow citizens—to "report" subversives who dare to say anything "fishy" about his health-care plan.

Obamaphile intolerance of dissent did not begin because of the attempt at reform of medical care. The White House, allied Congressmen, and other spendthrifts already had calumniated the participants in TEA Parties; the Director of Homeland Security had categorized anyone who disagrees with Obama policy as an extremist and a potential (or actual) terrorist; Injustice Department officials had vowed to hunt down “all actors” in the killing of late-term abortionist George Tiller, as if there were evidence that this incident had resulted from (as Secretary of State Clinton might say) a vast right-wing conspiracy; et cetera.

Nor is the Left's general intolerance of dissent coeval with the transformation of the Usa into an Obama Nation. The radical movements Communism and National Socialism (see We Have Met the Enemy, and They Are Ourselves) have long been synonymous with totalitarianism, and "totalitarianism lite" (see the list of domanisms, below) received its better-established nickname "political correctness" in the late 1980's (although it had already existed for some years prior to then). Laws and codes ostensibly directed against "hate," but actually intended to suppress resistance to "gay rights," "reverse" discrimination, and other left-of-center social-engineering schemes, had been a dream and often a reality for decades before the writing of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Pro-abortionists, who initially portrayed fœticide as a necessary evil, were, by the 1990's, acting as if merely having to defend their position on the issue amounted to a violation of their constitutional rights. In 1996, when President (Bill) Clinton attended a funeral service, a television-news camera recorded him laughing, but then, upon noticing that he was on camera, affecting to wipe away a tear; left-wingers, demonstrating that they consider even objective fact-finding equal to sedition, became indignant not at Clinton but at the man who had taken the film. In 1993, they spouted claptrap about Congressional "gridlock," as if Republicans (who were then in the minority anyway) had some sort of obligation not to oppose Clintonian legislation.

Despite all this, leftists have always presented themselves as champions of liberty.  In truth, they are not enemies of censorship at all; they just want exclusive rights to it.

Uncommon Commentary #67

Probably the worst feature of rule by the Obama-Reid-Pelosi junta is that the government is enacting legislation that will probably continue to be a burden even years after these malfeasants have (hopefully) been thrown out of office. It would be nice to have confidence that the next 1994- or 2002-style Republican landslide will cut short the criminally irresponsible spending programs currently being implemented, many of the adverse effects of which are not scheduled to take place for another decade yet; I've learned, though, that, no matter how bad anything may be, it is extremely difficult to abolish once established.

Uncommon Commentary #66: A Big Ms.take

Why do brownskirts [see the list of domanisms] demand the use of "gender-neutral" pseudo-words such as "clergyperson," yet insist upon distinguishing between the sexes in writing or saying "he or she," "his/her," &c.? (See Some Words About Words.  It's ironic also that they dreamt up the bogus title "Ms." to replace the marital-status-indicating "Miss" and "Mrs.," which abbreviate the same word: "mistress," the feminine of "master.") I think that it's because their movement has no rational basis, but is merely an exercise in paranoia.