The new Taliban has a "softer" image. They want to teach women addition and multiplication before blowing heads off.

Did you hear the great news? The new, improved and “softer” Taliban is letting girls get an education (in a mosque, of course). Diplomats everywhere are doing cartwheels, because the same guys who still think stoning women is a perfectly fine past time have at least allowed some of them to read at a sixth grade level. In the Afghanistan of tomorrow, at least women will be able to read the trumped up and fabricated charges against them before the rock throwing squad lines up for the boulder toss.

Like clockwork, a new “Can the Taliban be rehabilitated?” article sees the light of day (unlike women in Afghanistan, who are generally confined to a life indoors and always underneath their burka):

The Taliban’s restrictions on women and schooling, combined with support for al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden, turned the group into an international pariah even before the September 2001 attacks on America. Now, as the U.S. pulls out its troops and tries to negotiate a peace settlement with the insurgents, the international community grapples with a crucial question: If returned to power, will the Taliban behave any more responsibly this time around?

Did anyone ever ask if the Nazi party could be rehabilitated? Would Americans accept articles on “The slightly less racist KKK”? Of course not. It’s ridiculous. But somehow, Maulvi Qalamuddin, a guy who still considers Osama bin Laden to have been “a good man,” is given a platform to puke out useless platitudes.

“Education for women is just as necessary as education for men,” Mr. Qalamuddin thunders. “In Islam, men and women have the same duty to pray, to fast—and to seek learning.”

No one really asks Mr. Qalamuddin what his definition of learning is. Are women allowed to learn management skills? Are women allowed to learn English? I’ll save you the trouble of reading the full article for the answer to that second question: “No.”

Mr. Qalamuddin used to oversee The Committee to Protect Virtue and Prevent Vice in Afghanistan during the 90′s. For those not in the know, those were the “good old days” for The Taliban, when you could bring women to soccer fields and blow their head off with AK-47′s. Put another way, if radical Islamic terrorists had television there would be a Taliban version of Fonzi from Happy Days, blowing off women’s heads in a leather jacket. He’d pull the trigger and say his trademark, “Heeeeeey!”

The world doesn’t know how to deal with the Taliban because its moral compass no longer works. The ideas that give shape to the Taliban worldview must be rejected, as they are incompatible with the civilized world. Because the “international community” lacks the moral clarity to confront the problem head on, they hold out hope it will slide into a walking human rights violation that just shuffles around in the mountains of Afghanistan, leaving the rest of us alone.

It won’t.

There are only so many politically correct wars a nation can fight before the gloves come off or it rightfully fades away because of its own moral impotence. Perhaps The Iranian War will be where the final chapter is written.

An endless supply of Professor Frinks seek name recognition, and what better way is there to do that then to conclusively prove conservatives are dumb. Mmmhideum-hey.

Every few months a story pops up that claims to empirically demonstrate that liberals (coincidentally) have the pole position when it comes to the world’s intelligence-race.  Usually these studies cover their tracks with a multitude of qualifiers tucked away where only their peers will notice. Regardless, when eager media (like Pavlov’s dogs) write headlines like “Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice,” they’ve done their job.

The world can breathe a sigh of relief, because lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario, is cracking the “predjudice nut”!

“[In the study,] social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as “Family life suffers if mum is working full-time,” and “Schools should teach children to obey authority.” Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as “I wouldn’t mind working with people from other races.”

..As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.”

Yes. Yes. There were a lot of things that probably turned out “as suspected,” particularly the notion that conservatives are idiots. However, if you read all the way to the end of the story…you’ll find that a professor unconnected with the study actually provides some sanity:

“My speculation is that it’s not as simple as their model presents it,” [University of Virginia psychologist Brian Nosek] said. “I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where ‘People I don’t know are threats’ and ‘The world is a dangerous place’. … Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful,”
(Emphasis added).

Sadly for liberal scientists everywhere, Brian Nosek decided to play wet blanket. He rather astutely points out that, with the right phrases, the world might realize that liberal moral relativism also attracts a sizable population of idiots.

Years ago, when I was saving money for graduate school, I worked as substitute teacher. On quite a few occasions I worked with mentally disabled kids from middle school to high school. If I followed the logic of the headlines provided by Stephanie Pappas of LiveScience.com, I would have thought I was in a golden incubator for bigoted conservative voters. The truth? It seemed to me that the bigger the disability the kids had, the bigger their hearts were. The tougher their lives were, the brighter their outlook on the world. Often times I had to turn my back to the class to discretely compose myself, because witnessing young children dealing with pain and adversity with uncommon grace and poise is incredibly humbling.

There is a difference between causation and correlation, and media always blurs the lines when it makes them (i.e., liberals) look good. Instead of analyzing the principles that undergird conservatism, those Hayek deemed “second hand dealers in ideas” would rather find creative ways to slime its advocates. With the internet, they can no longer do so without being challenged (which might account for why so many liberals support internet censorship).

Think about it. Or, better put, run it up the flagpole and see.

At some point Spike Lee stopped making films and started making cathartic releases. Sad.

Remember when Spike Lee was budding with creative energy that you could almost see resonating from his body? That was a long time ago. Somewhere along the line Spike decided he was going to become a professional complainer, which is a shame because everyone knows he’d be a better professional filmmaker. At a screening of his latest film, Red Hook Summer, the complainer informed his audience that Hollywood executives know nothing about black people:

“We never went to the studios with this film, Chris [Rock] … I told you, we’re gonna do this motherfucking film ourselves! … I didn’t want to hear no motherfucking notes from the studio telling me about what a young 13-year-old boy and girl would do in Red Hook. Fuck no. They know nothing about black people. Nothing!”

Studio executives don’t know a lot about a lot things, and if this was a one-off rant I’d sympathize with Spike. But throughout his career he has forwarded the weird (racist?) notion that only black people can understand black people. Correction: Only black people who agree with Spike Lee can understand black people. It’s a mindset that I covered when “Madea” fans explicitly stated that white critics shouldn’t review the films.

What would be the reaction if white movie critics threw it out there that perhaps the new Wes Anderson movie, Moonrise Kingdom, should be off limits to black critics because of Anderson’s “white” sensibilities?

“Edward Norton. Jason Schwartzman. Bill Murray. Bruce Willis. Wire Fox Terriers! Nope, Spike, this film just might be too white for you to understand.”

Somehow, I don’t think Mr. Spike Lee would be happy. And rightfully so. Just as it would be weird (and racist) for me to insinuate my cultural background had an impenetrable wall of awesome whiteness around it, it’s equally backwards for Spike Lee to insinuate that only liberal, angry black guys can accurately critique a movie made by liberal, angry black guys.

Call me when you start making movies instead of cathartic releases, Spike. Oh, wait, I forgot—you’re old. You’re probably not going to change.  Sad.

Remember Fallujah? The people screaming the loudest about urinating Marines don't. The Uniform Code of Military Justice has worked for over half a century. The Taliban operate outside the rule of law. Case closed.

The world collectively yawned when Momar Gaddafi was sodomized with a crude instrument in his last bloody moments. Egypt’s Hussein Tantawi has a military whose first major objective after the fall of Hosni Mubarak was to strip down female protestors, drag them by the hair, and stomp on their chests. North Korea runs modern-day gulags, and it’s somehow fodder for late night comics. By and large American liberals are tight lipped about the barbaric nature of the enemies we face around the globe, so it’s rather peculiar that the video apparently depicting U.S. Marines urinating on dead Taliban has got them talking.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has put out a statement calling for those found guilty to have the book thrown at them:

“We trust that this disturbing incident will be promptly investigated in a transparent manner and that appropriate actions will be taken based on the results of that investigation. Any guilty parties must be punished to the full extent allowed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice and by relevant American laws.”

Missing from CAIR’s website is a condemnation of the tactics used by the Taliban, or the call for their members to be tried by an Islamic equivalent of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The fact remains: The Uniformed Code of Mujahideen Justice doesn’t exist. In 2004, a judicial system also wasn’t set up by al-Qaeda in Iraq when they charred American civilians in Fallujah, hung them from a bridge, and danced around their desecrated remains.

Also missing from the current debate are calls for Secretary of Leon Panetta to step down, as was the demand de rigueur for Donald Rumsfeld when details surrounding Abu Ghraib came to light. Those looking for intellectual consistency from the left will not find it, but the broader point is not missed by fair-minded folks: the Uniform Code of Military Justice works. When American troops lose their military manner they are held accountable for their actions. Liberalism’s self-flagellation brigades don’t understand that, but most Americans do.

Lynndie England and those responsible for Abu Ghraib were court-martialed and convicted. For every rare instance where an Army Specialist violates the UCMJ, there are countless others who never deviate from the Seven Army Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. For the outlier Marines that falter, there are battalions defined by the Marine Corps Values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment.

American soldiers deployed overseas are facing an enemy that uses women and children as shields, hide in hospitals and mosques, and don’t wear a standard uniform. Terrorists take advantage of Rules of Engagement crafted more for scoring points with the United Nations cocktail circuit than winning a war and securing the peace. Then, the politically correct chattering class wrings its hands over the blow back they’re largely responsible for.

The last thing the Pentagon wants is this generation’s John Kerry testifying before Congress that American war fighters are “reminiscent of Genghis Khan.” The top brass will see to it that Uniform Code of Military Justice does its job, as it has for over half a century. Liberals attempt to put the entire military on trial in the court of public opinion every time they see an opening. Once again, it’s up to conservatives to provide the proper defense.

American Sniper's Chris Kyle keeps returning to the idea of a guardian angel watching over him without ever acknowledging the extent to which he is one.

I gave American Sniper an abridged review upon its release, but it’s a book that deserves an extended version. Chris Kyle may be “the most lethal sniper in U.S. history, ” but he’s much more than that. Throughout the book, Kyle wrestles with the many roles he must play (i.e., husband, father, soldier) and the responsibilities he must balance with God, Family, and Country. We ask our soldiers to be killing machines, but then expect their humanity to remain unscathed. We order them to extinguish pure evil, but then give them Rules of Engagement better suited for cricket match. If for no other reason, civilians should read this book just for a glimpse into the psychological ringer we put our war fighters through without ever giving it a second thought.

One of the other topics that comes up repeatedly throughout American Sniper is the idea of a guardian angel. Chris postulates that there must have been one looking over him on multiple occasions (as does his friend Marcus Luttrell in the fabulous book Lone Survivor). What’s interesting about both these soldiers is that on some level they downplay the fact that THEY are guardian angels. Chris’ obsession becomes saving every solider in harms way—and impossible task that begins to take a psychological toll on him as the war moves on. After his battle buddy is shot, he blames himself:

I’d put him in the spot where he got hit. It was my fault he’d been shot…A hundred kills? Two hundred? What did they mean if my brother was dead? Why hadn’t I put myself there? Why hadn’t I been standing there? I could have gotten the bastard–I could have saved my boy. I was in a dark hole. Deep Down. How long I stayed there, head buried, tears flowing, I have no idea.”

Chris often observes the unpredictable nature of war, but when it comes to an injury or a death of a fellow soldier he seems to (unfairly) place full responsibility on his own shoulders. What Chris fails to realize is that even a guardian angel can not be all places at all times. His insatiable thirst to find and kill every last enemy is commendable, but readers will know long before he addresses the issue that yes, even Navy SEALS are human, and such a mentality lends itself to the kind of physiological problems (e.g., high blood pressure) he would experience later in his career. Luckily for Chris, this story has a happy ending.

The final aspect of the book that needs to be covered concerns how wars on won—something that is not taught in college classrooms, which might be the reason for the bongo-drumming anti-war protests I experienced years ago at USC:

YOU KNOW HOW RAMADI WAS WON? We went in and killed all the bad people we could find. When we started, the decent (or potentially decent) Iraqis didn’t fear the United States; they did fear the terrorists. The U.S. told them, “We’ll make it better for you.”

The terrorists said, “We’ll cut your head off.”

Who would you fear? Who would you listen to?

We went to Ramadi, we told the terrorists, “We’ll cut your head off. We will do whatever we have to and eliminate you.” Not only did we get the terrorists’ attention—we got everyone’s attention. We showed we were the force to be reckoned with. That’s where the so-called Great Awakening came from. It wasn’t from kissing up to the Iraqis. It was from kicking butt.

The tribal leaders saw that we were bad-asses, and they’d better get their act together, work together and stop accommodating the insurgents. Force moved that battle. We killed the bad guys and brought the leaders to the peace table. That is how the world works.

Chris Kyle makes a compelling case, and it’s one that doesn’t get the attention it deserves among the civilian population, which is sad. Regardless, I’d like to narrow the scope of his argument: The United States “works” because guardian angels like Chris are willing to enter into a realms of pure evil and push back. They do so selflessly. They do so at the expense to family and loved ones.

In the late 90′s I enlisted in a mechanized infantry unit. I wore a chain with the prayer to Saint Michael inscribed on it. Reading American Sniper made me realize that for a span of three years I lived and worked with guardian angels every day and I never adequately showed my appreciation to a great group of guys. Chris Kyle’s book will make you realize just how much we take the civilized world—and life—for granted. I highly recommend this book, for soldier and civilian alike.

Toby Keith opened a Pandora's Box when he created the Red Solo Cup song. The Obama administration is looking into possible antitrust law violations comitted by the Solo Cup Company.

No one can escape Toby Keith’s hit song, Red Solo cup. That’s good news—and bad news—for the Solo Cup Company, the juggernaut of plastic receptacles used at every college party you’ve ever attended. The Obama administration backed off its Christmas Tree tax in late 2011 when public backlash began to build, but with the viral video for Red Solo Cup reaching millions, officials say that antitrust violations previously under the radar have been brought to light and will be addressed.

Late on Friday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney had this to say:

Some say that monopolies tend to emerge when one company provides quality, desired goods and services at an affordable price. Microsoft is a prime example. People like their computers. They generally like what Bill Gates has done to raise the standard of living of hundreds of millions of people across the globe. Unfortunately, they’re also blinded by the very real, very evil downside of allowing success go forward, unchecked by the watchful eye of the Democrats. The Solo Cup Company’s unfair market share on party cups threatens the very free market it benefits from. As I speak, federal lawmakers are crafting The Solo Cup Antitrust Act of 2012, which will bring balance and fairness back to the plastic container industry.

Solo Company’s Director of Communications, Angie Gorman, responded with a clear, concise and unscripted defense of the company:

“The Obama administration has demonstrated time and time again it doesn’t drink from Solo Cups, but from the well of crony capitalism. And when it does use cups, they are provided by Dixie lobbyists intent on getting the latest addition to the long line of Obamacare waivers. We’ll see the federal government in court, and when we win we’ll have a party—with red Solo cups. Period.”

Analysts note that Tea Party activists are not likely to blame Toby Keith for the debacle. Instead, they say that this this is another example of a tone deaf administration, which seeks to implement policies that will alienate Southern independents, young people, and blue collar moms and pops in swing states Obama needs to win reelection.

Toby Keith was not available for comment, but he might not be able to avoid making a statement if Democrats push forward with planned Solo Cup Company Congressional hearings.

How do you sell a new show to Americans? If you're Rob Schneider, you go on the radio and admit that the inspiration for "Rob!" never wanted to come here. And then you bash Western Civilization.

Rob Schneider has been trying to resurrect his career for awhile now. In the past he thought taking jabs at Dennis Miller’s conservatism would win him some brownie points with liberal critics. Perhaps it worked, because he was given a shot at his own show, the eponymous “Rob!” While I personally think it’s quite a gamble (to put it nicely) to create a show based on the strength of Rob Schneider’s shoulders, God bless the producer who did.

Rob’s newest strategy for winning over American audiences is to fully disclose that the inspiration for the show, his wife, never really wanted to come here. As a cherry on top, he proffers that Western Civilization was inferior to the Mayans and Aztecs, except in their ability to spread disease. Washington, DC’s Elliot from Elliot In The Morning never threw him a life line, but then why would he? A guest’s stupidity often makes for great radio.

Elliot: I know that in reading about the show they talk about how it’s loosely based on your real life. I don’t believe you ran off and eloped to Vegas, but what’s with your wife’s family—

Rob Schneider: My wife is from Mexico. She came over here on a tourist visa. I was madly in love with her. She didn’t want to get married, to be honest. It’s different than in the show. My wife never saw herself getting married. She loves Mexico more than America. That’s her country. She worked there. She’s given up her culture, her language, her family, her friends, the food. She wasn’t like the people who want to come to America. She never saw that, but she fell in love with me. I talked her into getting married. And we did. We just went off to the courthouse. Some idiot took a picture of me and her on their cellphone, and the next thing you know it’s on the tabloids…

Elliot: One of the clips that I’ve seen, you’re in grandma’s room and you’re straightening the portrait and it falls and there’s all prayer candles underneath. Is that her family?

Rob Schneider: She’s Catholic. They’re very religious. They don’t just believe in Jesus. They also believe in Jesus’ mom. They have the whole Catholic thing going. It’s lovely. There’s a thing about the Mayan and Aztecs, who were just ahead—the most advanced civilization in 1492 was not the Europeans. The Europeans were only advanced in filth and disease. That was their biggest advance… I’m getting way too into this, aren’t I?

Could it be, that one of the reasons why Rob’s wife didn’t see why millions of immigrants flock to America every year is because her mind is filled anti-colonialist clap trap?  Why would anyone want to move to America if someone put their brain through the multicultural rinse cycle? Rob probably has some very astute observations about inter-racial marriages, but like his acting career he’s prone to stumbling and bumbling through the delivery. Perhaps at another time I’ll discuss my own inter-racial relationship (and now marriage) just to say I’ve waded through that mine field, but right now it might be best to discuss the so-called superiority of the Aztecs. If Rob wants to play that game, let’s do so.

I’ll refrain from discussing inter-tribal rape, head lice, and infanticide. Instead, I’ll let Dinesh’ D’souza dismantle Rob’s inane argument:

When Cortes captured the Aztec emperor Montezuma and his attendants, he would only permit them temporary release on the promise that they stop their traditional practices of cannibalism and human sacrifice, but he found that “as soon as we turned our heads they would resume their old cruelties.” Aztec cannibalism, writes anthropologist Marvin Harris, “was not a perfunctory tasting of ceremonial tidbits.” Indeed the Aztecs on a regular basis consumed human flesh in a stew with peppers and tomatoes, and children were regarded as a particular delicacy. Cannibalism was prevalent among the Aztecs, Guarani, Iroquois, Caribs, and several other tribes.

Moreover, the Aztecs of Mexico and the Incas of South America performed elaborate rites of human sacrifice, in which thousands of captive Indians were ritually murdered, until their altars were drenched in blood, bones were strewn everywhere, and priests collapsed with exhaustion from stabbing their victims. The law of the Incas provided for punishment of parents and others who displayed grief during human sacrifices. When men of noble birth died, wives and concubines were often strangled and buried with them.

Multicultural textbooks, committed to a contemporary version of the noble savage portrait, cannot acknowledge historical facts that would embarrass the morality tale of white invaders despoiling the elysian harmony of the Americans.

Would you like me to drop another bomb on you, Rob? I probably shouldn’t, since I have the feeling that your show is a big piece of unexploded ordinance sitting on the CBS lot. I wish it wasn’t, but everything in my gut says that the CBS producers sought to fill the void left behind by really bad television shows watched by George Lopez fans.

Oh, and before you accuse me of being the angry, racist white guy stewing in his basement over minority television shows, I have have one thing to say: Fresh Prince of Bel Air. Classic. What kid in the 90′s didn‘t love it? And if that doesn’t convince you, “Yo, Holmes, forget it, I’m off to Bel Air.”

How odd is it that former Navy SEAL, Chris Kyle, has killed more terrorists than the number of "Occupy" protesters who will buy his book?

On Saturday I bought American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History. On Sunday I started reading it. Tonight, I finished it. Needless to say, it was worth the $27.00 I laid down on the counter. If you’re a fan of Marcus Luttrell, you’ll want to add this one to your collection. If you’re a fan of Harry “surrender monkey” Reid, you might not. My full review will come in the near future, but there is one excerpt that I think sums up the essence of the book:

One night a little later on, we were in an exhausting firefight. Ten of us spent roughly forty-eight hours in the second story of an old, abandoned brick building, fighting in hundred-degree-plus heat wearing full armor. Bullets flew in, demolishing the walls around us practically nonstop. The only break we took was to reload.

Finally, as the sun came up in the morning, the sound of gunfire and bullets hitting brick stopped. The fight was over. It was eerily quiet.

When the Marines came in to relieve us , they found every man in the room either slumped against a wall or collapsed on the floor, dressing wounds or just soaking in the situation.

One of the Marines outside took an American flag and hoisted it over the position. Someone else played the National Anthem—I have no idea where the music came from, but the symbolism and the way it spoke to the soul was overwhelming; it remains one of my most powerful memories.

Every battle-weary man rose, went to the window, and saluted. The words of the music echoed in each of us as we watched the Stars and Stripes wave literally in dawn’s early light. The reminder of what we were fighting for caused tears as well as blood and sweat to run freely from all of us, (American Sniper, 84-85).

American Sniper is a very telling book. Patriots exist. But the patriotism displayed by Chris Kyle is not instilled in children today. It’s ironically very foreign to them, which is why Kyle’s run-in with anti-war protestors earlier in the book has such a profound effect on him. Once upon a time an overwhelming majority of Americans knew what it was the Chris Kyle’s of the world stood for, even if they could never know what it was like to be a SEAL. Once upon a time an overwhelming majority of Americans were rooted in the same love of country, even if military service wasn’t their calling.

Today, it’s different. It seems as though decades of moral and cultural relativism, taught in universities and reenforced through media, has taken its toll. The country is desperate for someone—anyone—who can articulate why the bedrock values the country was built on (e.g., limited government, free markets, and a strong national defense), are still relevant today. The Tea Party and the “Occupy” movements have charted two very different paths for Americans to walk down, and those in the middle are confused as to which road to take. American Sniper is a portrait of the type of American we should all aspire to be, and while Chris Kyle isn’t particularly political, the principles that guide him are deeply tied to our political discourse.

I highly suggest reading American Sniper. When you’re done you’ll have a deeper respect for the work that guys like Chris do, but you’ll also see why modern American conservatism is the last, best hope to preserving our great nation.

Update: The expanded book review for American Sniper is now up.

David Frum, author of "Comeback: Conservatism that Can Win Again" has a weird solution to the "obesity epidemic"---liberalism.

Despite his role as a spoiler for Al Gore in the 2000 elections, Ralph Nader is known for his book Unsafe at Any Speed. It’s generally considered canon for anyone who has a disturbing love for seat belts, flat rubberized dashboards, and government regulation. In David Frum’s latest piece he channels Nader, laying out a massive (no pun intended) problem for the nation that needs fixing: obesity. Unfortunately, his suggestions all lead down the path to a bigger, bloated federal government (pun intended). Perhaps he can write a book: Fat at Any Calorie Count.

Weight gain is driven by two trends: increases in calories consumed and decrease in calories expended. Modern America induces both.

For example: The after-inflation cost of sugary soda has declined by an estimated 48% over the past 20 years. Correspondingly, consumption of sugary soda has soared: Sugary soda is now the single most important source of calories in the American diet.

Hmmm. I wonder if David thinks the federal government might want to start taxing soda. Social engineering through the tax system! Brilliant! Since Europe is already doing it, and David seems like the kind of guy who takes his cues from French elitists, I’m guessing he’d be pro-soda tax.

But wait, there’s more:

Americans could theoretically compensate for more sedentary lifestyles by stepping up their recreational exercise — but only about 20% of Americans bother. Some 80% never do — including presumably all those failed dieters.

Want to change this? It’s no small project. It would involve the redesign of cities, the relocation of schools, the reinvention of our modes of eating and amusement.

First lady Michelle Obama has made healthy eating her special project. Good for her, and let’s hope her efforts lead to success. But if we are to succeed, we should understand: The campaign against obesity will have to look a lot less like the campaign against smoking (which involves just one decision, to smoke or not to smoke) and much more like the generation-long campaign against highway fatalities, which required the redesign of cars, the redesign of highways, and changes in personal behavior like seat-belt use and drunk driving.

Ralph Nader? Check. Michelle Obama and the “no unlimited soup, salad, and breadsticks for you” Olive Garden plan? Check. The call for more city planners (i.e., bureaucrats) and busy bodies to solve a problem that doesn’t need city planners? Check.

How much do you want to bet that David’s book, Comeback: Conservatism That Can Win Again, really just says that conservatives should become liberals? It’s kind of hard to believe otherwise when he seems to recoil in the face of actual conservatism.

As I’ve said before, we don’t have an obesity epidemic, we have a stupidity epidemic. The way to solve this problem isn’t by asking the American people to abdicate more freedoms and personal responsibilities to the federal government—it’s by demanding more of the American people. It’s by teaching them that there can be value gained through self-denial and sacrifice. Common sense is no longer common, but the answer to our problems isn’t to let guys like David Frum or women like Michelle Obama “solve” them.

Want to solve the “obesity epidemic,” David? Try conservatism:

Conservatives who face down steel plates regularly know that they can glean important life lessons from their routines. They approach the cold, uncaring metal (that doesn’t respond to excuses or sob stories) like they do life, and they’re much better for it.

Working out with a friend or a complete stranger whose genetics or upbringing has them looking better or lifting more than you from the get go? The weights don’t care. Inequalities exist – deal with it. Work harder and smarter than the next guy. Put in hours in the gym or your basement or the garage long after everyone else is out partying, and more often than not the long haul will reward you. And if not, who cares – because there’s always someone who’s bigger and faster and stronger than you. And in the end it’s not really about the weights anyway. It’s about the work ethic that carries over into other aspects of your life without you realizing it. It’s about knowing that there’s a deeper meaning to life, and that the picture becomes clearer through sweat and effort instead of sloth and apathy.

If the “conservative” in your life mines the Ralph Nader file for solutions to our country’s biggest problems, he’s probably not conservative. And if he says he’ll see you “on the jogging path” he’s probably not one to turn to for weight loss advice, either.

Now Navy Divers…you can learn a lot from those guys.

Best,

Doug

The “Occupy” movement is like a box of Lucky Charms, although instead of “Pink Hearts, Orange Stars, Yellow Moons, Green Clovers, Blue Diamonds, and Purple Horseshoes,” we have “Envious Hearts, Liberal Stars, Defecating Moons, Green (with Envy) Students, Blue States, and Purple Hair.” And now, instead of “Red Balloons” we have “Flag-burning Buffoons!” Magically delicious? Not quite:

Officers said they noticed the suspects lighting something on fire directly in front of the Occupy camp along Trade Street around 12:30 a.m. Friday morning.

Police swarmed the area, and detained the men while firefighters were called in to knock down the flames. About $30 worth of damage was caused to landscaping at the site.

It was only after the fire was out did officials figure out what was burning, the American flag. Police said the men claimed they were burning the flag in protest. Burning the flag is not illegal, however doing it outside of a fire pit, and within ten feet from flammable tents poses a problem.

Unlike some of my conservative friends, I don’t think burning the flag should be illegal. I almost always get teary-eyed when I see Rick Monday save the flag in one of the greatest baseball moments of all time… but I’m quite comfortable stating that flag-burning idiots should be allowed to be flag-burning idiots without the threat of imprisonment. While there are often patriotic Americans who are able to do the right thing (e.g., Rick Monday), when there aren’t, the act tells sane Americans everything they need to know about the perpetrators.

Have a beef with Wall Street? Fine. Have a beef with Washington, DC? Fine. Have issues because in a free and open society with almost limitless opportunity you wound up a loser? Fine. Take it up at the ballot box or run around in your stupid V for Vendetta masks, but don’t burn the flag, because you instantly join the ranks of misfits, malcontents, treasonous scum and the stupid stooges in the Middle East.

If the Occupy Charlotte movement wants to light things on fire and dance around flames like neanderthals, let them. While their New York brethren are pooing in public and screeching like chimpanzees, they can show registered voters that at least they’ve mastered fire. And when the 2012 election comes to pass, independents will remember which movement read the Federalist Papers and which movement had to read up on a good lawyer because rape and murder charges can be tricky without good representation.