Thursday, November 01, 2012


Motherhood was once a byword for something everyone approved of but with the coming of feminism mothers are sometimes actually condemned  -- as "breeders", for instance.  Women are deluded into thinking that a "career" is more important than a family.

But mothers have the last laugh.  Have you ever seen smiles like the ones below on the faces of dried-out feminist butches?  I have known a lot of feminists (I taught in a Sociology school for many years) but I never have.

Smiles like the one below and the satisfaction that underlies them are a gift of nature but only people who are in tune with nature get them

I think all my comments in this post are however for people with feelings.  The way many Leftists positively celebrate abortion there must be many of them who are severely deficient in normal human feelings.  What I say here must be unintelligible to them   -- JR.

The happiness that only a baby can bring: The mother’s smile says it all:


Background:  Bianca and Matt Smith's two children, nine-week-old Mason and 22-month-old Isla, were both long-awaited arrivals with the help of Melbourne IVF.  Ms Smith, 35, said that after years of trying to conceive naturally, she was investing her energy in raising happy, well-adjusted children.

"You long for them for so long. You spend a lot of money and time going through a lot physically and emotionally, and it's all worth it," Ms Smith said.



Background: Like most new mothers, Katie Brown readily admits she is besotted with her baby son. But the 29-year-old has more reason than most to feel blessed by Ethan’s safe arrival – because he is the child she was afraid it would be impossible for her to have.

Following a routine smear test, Miss Brown was diagnosed with cervical cancer and warned she could die without a hysterectomy. But, distraught that she would never be able to have children of her own, she was offered the chance to undergo pioneering surgery to save both her life and her fertility. The operation, which has been performed on just a handful of British women, was a success.

To her doctor’s amazement, Miss Brown became pregnant six months later and Ethan was born by Caesarean section weighing a healthy 7lb 11oz.

Miss Brown, a dental hygienist, said: ‘Holding Ethan in my arms for the first time was the most amazing feeling ever, it was the best day of my life. It was very, very emotional.



As we see above, mothers sometimes go through a lot to get their babies.  There is no doubt, however, that ALL parents go though a lot in bringing up children.  Below is an excerpt from a humorous article that gives a version of the travails of parenthood.  The article was however preceded by the picture below of a little pink being with the most beautiful blue eyes.  I have no doubt that, despite the travails so vividly described, there would still be very many who would like that little pink being for their own  -- JR

Are you ready to have kids? Some things to check

Test 1: Preparation

Women: To prepare for pregnancy

1. Put on a dressing gown and stick a beanbag down the front.
2. Leave it there.
3. After 9 months remove 5% of the beans.

Men: To prepare for children

1. Go to a local chemist, tip the contents of your wallet onto the counter and tell the pharmacist to help himself
2. Go to the supermarket. Arrange to have your salary paid directly to their head office.
3. Go home. Pick up the newspaper and read it for the last time.

Test 2: Knowledge

Find a couple who are already parents and berate them about their methods of discipline, lack of patience, appallingly low tolerance levels and how they have allowed their children to run wild.

Suggest ways in which they might improve their child's sleeping habits, toilet training, table manners and overall behaviour.

Enjoy it. It will be the last time in your life that you will have all the answers.

More here

In Defense of English Civilization

Sean Gabb indulges in some fantasy

We know that England is under attack, and from its own ruling class. Before we can speak of defense, we need to understand the reasons for the attack.

This is not an attack on tradition in itself, but the unfolding of an alternative tradition.

Part of what defines a nation is the relationship between its ruling class and the people at large. Our historic self-perception as English is based on the relationship between rulers and ruled that existed before 1914, and, though to a fading degree, for a couple of generations thereafter.

The English people in 1914 were capable of fully democratic self-government. They had the necessary cultural and genetic cohesiveness for a democratic system not to descend into chaos or majoritarian tyranny.

Democracy, however, was not necessary, as the oligarchy of hereditary landlords who ruled England had absolutely identified itself with the nation. Every interest group had its place within the nation, and there was a place for all.

After 1914, the old ruling class was destroyed—the heavy casualties of both World Wars, high taxes on static wealth, demands for a fraudulent kind of democracy, and so forth. The old ruling class went down before all this, because it never tried to evade the duties that came with national identification.

The new ruling class is a coalition of politicians, bureaucrats, educators, lawyers, media people, and associated business interests that draws income and status from an enlarged and activist state. It does not own the means of production but is content merely to control them. Its general desire is to avoid the entanglements that destroyed the old ruling class. It wishes to avoid more than token identification with the English people at large.

“Conservatives, after all, should not wish to copy the mistakes of the French revolutionaries.”
The present—and so far the most successful—scheme of liberation is to make power opaque and unaccountable by shifting it upwards to various multinational treaty organizations—e.g., the EU, WTO, NATO, etc.—and to Balkanize England into groupings more suspicious of each other than willing to combine against the ruling class.

State-sponsored mass immigration has been the most obvious evidence of this desire. Filling the country with people of different colors and with different ways, which do not like each other, and do not like and are not liked by the natives, is ideal Balkanization. But one of the purposes of political correctness is also to divide the native population—women against men, homosexuals against Christians, and so forth.

The final desire is for the mass of ordinary people to be dispossessed and impoverished and unable to challenge structures of exploitation that channel fantastic wealth to a free-floating class of masters.

If we want to avoid this, we must destroy the ruling class now. Its weakness is its reliance on the state as source or enabler of its income. Conservatives, therefore, must seize control of the state and disestablish the ruling class.

If we want to win the battle for this country, we need to take advice from the Marxists. These are people whose ends were evil where not impossible. But they were experts in the means to their ends. They knew more than we have ever thought about the seizure and retention of power. If, therefore, we ever achieve a government of conservatives and seek to bring about the irreversible transfer of power to ordinary people, we should take to heart what Marx said in 1871 after the failure of the Paris Commune:

…the next attempt of the French Revolution will be no longer, as before, to transfer the bureaucratic-military machine from one hand to another, but to smash it, and this is the precondition for every real people’s revolution….

The meaning of this is that we should not try to work with the ruling class. We should not try to jolly it along. We should not try fighting it on narrow fronts. We must regard it as the enemy, and we must smash it.

On the first day of our government of conservatives, we should close down the BBC. We should take it off the air. We should disclaim its copyrights. We should throw all its staff into the street and cancel their pensions. We should not try to privatize the BBC. This would simply be to transfer the voice of our enemy from the public to the private sector, where it might be more effective in its opposition. We must shut it down—and shut it down at once.

We should do the same with much of the administration. The Foreign Office, much of the Home Office, the Commission for Racial Equality, or whatever it is now called, anything to do with health and safety and planning and child protection—I mean much of the public sector—these should be shut down.

If at the end of your first month in power, we have not shut down half of the state, we are failing. If we have shut down half the state, we have made a step in the right direction and are ready for still further cuts.

Let me emphasize that the purpose of these cuts would not be to save money for the taxpayers or lift an immense weight of bureaucracy from their backs—though they would do this. The purpose is to destroy the ruling class before it can destroy us. We must tear up the web of power and personal connections that make these people effective as an opposition to radical change. If we do this, we shall face no more clamor than if we moved slowly and halfheartedly.

One obvious sign of success will be when depensioned enemies like Neil Kinnock and Peter Mandelson are seen serving on the cheese counter in Sainsbury.


British police overwhelmed by 4,000 ‘petty squabbles’ on Facebook and Twitter, with three arrests a day for offensive messages

Police forces across Britain are being forced to deal with petty squabbles on Facebook, Twitter and other social network sites every day when  they could be tackling more serious crimes.

Officers say they are wasting valuable time and resources tackling internet users directing abuse at each other.

In most cases, police simply tell victims to delete their tormentors from their networks, but the Crown Prosecution Service says a ‘few dozen’ more serious incidents have led to court, with the figure growing rapidly in recent months.

Internet trolls made sick comments about pop singer Adele’s baby boy within hours of his birth, and Tom Daley and  diving partner Peter Waterfield were called ‘team HIV’ on Twitter by Welsh Premier League footballer Daniel Thomas, who was arrested but escaped prosecution because the duo did not press charges

New figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday show that at least three arrests are being made every day for sending offensive messages via phones and computers, including  people harassing ex-partners by text message and making hoax threats as well as comments on social media.

An officer from Essex who asked not to be named said: ‘I dread to think how many hours are spent on Facebook jobs. If you don’t do at least one a day it’s been a very quiet day.’

He told how one man repeatedly called to claim that his ex-girlfriend was setting up fake accounts pretending to be him on Facebook, which has 900 million members worldwide.

When officers told the man  to simply stop using Facebook,  he replied: ‘But then I can’t see what they are saying about me.’

A young woman told police in Dorset she had received death threats on Facebook.  But when officers investigated, they found she had actually threatened to spread malicious rumours about another woman, who had replied: ‘I hope you die then.’

An officer from the West Midlands told how he had advised someone complaining of Facebook abuse to ‘unfriend’ their abuser, only to be told: ‘But I won’t have as many friends.’

Others expected police to have a ‘magic wand’ allowing them to access all Facebook accounts and find out who was behind offensive messages.

An officer from North Wales said: ‘You will always have one or two serious incidents of  harassment and bullying on Facebook and the like but for the most part it’s petty stuff.

It takes up a lot of time and the normal result is advice from us to all parties to grow up.’

Simon Reed, vice-chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said: ‘We have concerns that we don’t have the resources to police everything that’s said on the internet.

We can’t have people getting upset in a one-off situation and involving the police.

I do think this could be the thin end of the wedge.  If we show too much willingness and get involved in every squabble, we’re setting ourselves up to keep doing this because it will be expected.’

He said it was right for police to investigate cases involving homophobia or racism, but added: ‘We shouldn’t be dealing with individual squabbles.’

The laws most commonly used to prosecute anyone who posts offensive material online, or ‘trolls’ who goad public figures and victims’ relatives, make it illegal to send a grossly offensive or obscene message using an electronic network, and apply even if it is sent privately to only one person or just repeats what another has said.

Statistics from 22 out of the  43 police forces in England and Wales show there were at least 4,098 arrests under the relevant laws between the start of 2009 and the middle of 2012, averaging three a day.

More than 2,000 people were either charged or given an out-of-court fine or caution.


Who's a Racist?

Cal Thomas

On MSNBC's Ed Schultz program Friday night, the former chief of staff for Colin Powell, retired Army Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, said, of the Republican Party, "My party is full of racists ... and the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander in chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin ... that's despicable." [Wilkerson has long been a contrarian  --JR]

Wilkerson's allegation followed his former boss's endorsement of President Obama for a second term. The history of racism has certainly stained both parties and there are racist Democrats and racist Republicans, but when the race card is played this close to the election, I suspect the pro-Obama forces are sensing trouble.

We've come a long way in four years, from a transracial candidate who didn't see a white or black America, but one America, to one in which if a white person votes for Mitt Romney that is evidence the voter is a racist. Suppose that white person voted for Obama four years ago and thinks the president doesn't deserve a second term because he's done a poor job? Was the person not a racist in 2008, but morphed into one in 2012?

When white liberals voted against the confirmation of Justice Clarence Thomas (including then-Senator Joe Biden) were they racist? Many white liberal Democrats are working overtime to defeat Rep. Allen West, Florida Republican. Are they racist?

Let's reverse the polarity. According to a recent NBC/WSJ poll, 90 percent of African-Americans are expected to vote for the president. For those who will do so solely to demonstrate racial solidarity, does this qualify them to be inducted into the racist hall of shame? And what about conservative blacks who are voting for Romney? They're called disparaging names by some blacks. Is that racism?

Mia Love, the mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah, is running for Congress. She is an African-American woman and a Republican. If white Democrats oppose her, are they guilty of a twofer: racism and sexism?

While I didn't vote for Barack Obama in 2008 (and won't this time) because of his extreme liberalism, not his skin color, I was still proud of my country for electing the first African-American president. If a qualified conservative African-American had been running, I would have voted for him (or her). That fulfills the wish of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., that all people be judged on their character, not their skin color.

I endorsed the nonviolent protests of Dr. King to advance civil rights, but opposed the incendiary rhetoric of Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael, the Black Panther Party and other black revolutionaries of the 1960s. Was I not a racist when I supported Dr. King, but racist when I opposed black radicals? How does one judge such things? Where's the racist detector and who gets to operate it?

A Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll concluded that "The 2012 election is shaping up to be more polarized along racial lines than any presidential contest since 1988, with President Obama experiencing a steep drop in support among white voters from four years ago."

The Post-ABC News pollsters, who appear to see so much through racially-colored glasses, might have asked some of those white voters who supported President Obama four years ago why they are supporting Mitt Romney now. I would be willing to wager most, if not all, would say the president's performance has not lived up to their expectations or his hype about hope and change.

For supporters of President Obama, including Republican-in-name-only Lawrence Wilkerson, to suggest that Republicans want him out of the White House simply because he's black, is a desperate attempt by a faltering campaign to change the subject from the president's record and lack of vision for the future.

That isn't racist. That's fact.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICSDISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL  and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine).   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: