Considering Islam, Obamacare Ruling Is the Least of Our Problems

Considering Islam, Obamacare Ruling Is the Least of Our Problems

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ defection to the dark side on the issue of Obamacare was startling and incredibly disappointing.




Nevertheless, there are noteworthy positives associated with his decision to join the ranks of extreme Leftists on SCOTUS, one of whom should have recused herself had she possessed a shred of integrity, and opt to support a law that was foisted on the American people by the Democrat Party.



For one, Roberts’ vote demonstrated that an ardent conservative can sometimes stray from the consevative path, unlike liberals on the Court and elsewhere who would rather swallow their shoes than voice disagreements with leftist ideology.



For another, declaring Obamacare constitutional offered Mitt Romney the opportunity to gain millions of votes from the majority of Americans who believe the concept of British-style socialized medicine stinks.



For yet another, mandating Obamacare once again outed President Barack Hussein Obama as a liar since the 5-4 split decesion essentially imposes a huge tax increase, a tax the president has repeatedly and emphatically vowed would never happen.



In any event, when Obama is thrown out of office in November and Republicans sweep House and Senate races, Obamacare will be methodically dismantled. Only the good features of the Unaffordable Care Act, such as elimination of lifetime dollar limits on policies and elimination of co-pays for preventive care, will be retained.



More importantly, the entire brouhaha over Obamacare and unduly stressing over a SCOTUS ruling may be moot and a foolish disregard for geopolitical realities–the dire threat to the nation posed by Islam and Muslim extremists intent not on merely destroying America’s health care system but on destroying America itself.



Among the president’s many other flaws is his ignorant obliviousness of the fundamental evil that is Islam. And that evil is not confined to Muslim countries. It is speading rapidly to the West, to America’s shores, and even to our military.



Read the story of British journalist Natasha Smith who, last year, was ecstatic over the glorious, popular upheaval of the Arab Spring. This spring Ms. Smith came face to face with the true nature of Islam in Cairo’s Tahir Square.



She described her not unprecedented experience (remember CBS New’s Lara Logan?) after the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammed Corsi’s visit to Obama’s White House and his victory in Egypt’s presidential election.



Smith graphically wrote on her blog: “Men began to rip off my clothes. I was stripped naked. Their insatiable appetite to hurt me heightened. These men, hundreds of them, had turned from humans to animals.



“Hundreds of men pulled my limbs apart and threw me around. They were scratching and clenching my breasts and forcing their fingers inside me in every possible way. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=26055.)

America 2012: A Nation at Risk

America 2012: A Nation at Risk

“Stuff” is happening in America today that our country has rarely witnessed in our 224 year old history and none of it is propitious for our future.




True, we have suffered through other major crises, but never so many at the same time.



We survived the Revolution and early wars and revolts against our nationhood; we weathered a bloody Civil War; we eventually overcame the Great Depression; we struggled through the upheavals of the Civil Rights Movement the Viet Nam War protests; we mostly recovered from the horrors of September 11th, 2001; we lost thousands of our brave troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and some believe we actually won those wars.



However, we have never endured so many contemporaneous, dire threats to our national security, our fiscal future, our way of life, our cherished values, and our national character as we are witnessing today.



America made a grave mistake in November, 2008, a terrible mistake which, in the brief span of three and a half years, has served to greatly intensify those dire threats.



To be sure, the election of President Barack Hussein Obama did not incite crazed Muslim terrorists to launch an unprovoked war against the “Great Satan” and the entire Western world; that war has been ongoing for decades and has been smoldering for centuries.



What Obama has done is to minimize the magnitude of the dangers posed by Islam and has catered to, literally bowed to, the very Muslim potentate whose country hatched and financed 9/11.



He declared that a war on terrorism didn’t exist and then announced that the non-existent war was over by virtue of the defeat of al-Qaeda and our supposed victories in Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of which is a valid assumption.



He established domestic security measures which are more smoke and mirrors than actual safety nets. Perhaps the most telling feature of this commander-in-chief’s perspective on Americans’ safety was his 2010 concession to Fareed Zakariah that we are “resilient” enough to “bounce back” after nuclear attacks.



We were woefully unprepared for the Second World War. We are far more vulnerable in this, the Third World War, thanks to our president.



Should we somehow succeed in overcoming Muslim forces intent on destroying the America we love, we would still have to contend with the Great Recession, an economy which began to implode in 2008 and which shows few signs of real recovery.



The Obama administration’s total disregard for fiscal sanity and racking up trillions of dollars in unprecedented national deficits and debt has already cost the United States its long-standing AAA credit rating with no hope of paying our bills in sight.



The administration’s obsession with socialistic social programs such as food stamps, multi-billion dollar boondoggles and bailouts, and oppressive environmental regulations have stifled job growth and fostered dependency among the millions of the poor and the unemployed.



In brief, our economy and our society are a critical mess, a disaster as beneficial to Obama’s re-election prospects due to that widespread dependency as it is destructive of the human spirit.



Wars and rumors of war combined with economic malaise would be more than sufficient to effect America’s downfall. Unfortunately, there’s much more on our dismal plate: The social fabric which is supposed to bind us together and define us as a nation is disintegrating as rapidly as the integrity of our borders. . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=23948.)

Obama Changes We Can Really Believe In?

Obama Changes We Can Really Believe In?

I haven’t had the pleasure of visiting the White House in decades so I can’t personally attest to all of the following details on recent alterations in America’s executive mansion but they are interesting, to say the least.

For example, has anyone noticed that our president no longer conducts his rare press conferences with the traditional trappings of American flags in the background?

Instead, a bright yellow curtain replete with what some people believe are Arabic symbols now decorates the press room, along with Obama’s trusty teleprompters, of course, without which he tends to put his foot in his mouth.

And, has anyone noticed that the decor at the White House has radically changed since the Obama clan occupied 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

The Oval Office is now almost devoid of the traditional display of American red, white, and blue. It has been replaced with what appears to be middle eastern wallpaper, drapes, and decor and the hallway Obama uses to talk to the press now features middle eastern-style chairs, drapes, etc.

And, has anyone noticed that Obama seems more Islamic than he seems American?

It’s understandable, actually, since his paternal heritage is Muslim, all his Kenyan relatives are Muslims, his mother married two Muslims, and he spent years of his childhood in Muslim Indonesia where he was partially educated in a Muslim madrassa and he diligently studied the Quran.

Before any White House alterations were made, surely the POTUS had extensive input from his lovely, style-conscious FLOTUS who, only a few years ago discovered she was proud of her country. She must be even more proud of her husband’s Muslim roots.

Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama must also be tickled pink that America’s White House now reflects both her tastes and her hubby’s documented Islamic affiliations even though those tastes and affiliations give rise to suspicions that the Obamas aren’t all we have been led to believe in.

Is Barack Hussein Obama a Muslim at heart? . . . (See pictures and read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=18390.)

Muslims in America

Muslims in America

Notwithstanding TLC’s cancellation of the reality show, “All-American Muslim,” because it didn’t portray reality and because the Muslims depicted weren’t as much Americans as they were Islamists, Muslims have been making inroads into American society and becoming a force to be reckoned with.

Just a few examples of growing Islamic influence in America: Muslim schoolkids are given preferences over non-Muslims in New York City schools and elsewhere; the Muslim Brotherhood was "consulted" on the appointment of the Los Angeles police chief; Twitter just closed down accounts critical of Syrian dictator Assad on request of his wife; and the Black Muslim official newspaper characterized Glenn Beck as “a minion of the synagogue of Satan” for daring to intimate that President Barack Hussein Obama’s life could be in danger.

True, Islamists occasionally overstep but, for the most part, they are granted special treatment mainly due to the mainstream media’s fear of violent and bloody Muslim retaliation should the MSM report extensively on such horrors as “mercy killings” or treat Islamists with the same disdain they treat Christians.

One Muslim, the black racist leader of the subversive Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, knows no bounds when it comes to spewing his extremist views but he recently discovered that even the students and faculty at one of the most liberal universities in the country have their limits of tolerance.

Last Saturday, Farrakhan addressed an audience of some 600 at the University of California Berkeley where they are accustomed to applauding subversion and anti-Americanism. However, he crossed the PC line when he launched into a tirade against his favorite punching bag, Jews.

Why his virulently anti-Semitic rant came as a surprise to the audience is mystifying since Farrakhan has lambasted Jews for decades and has called Judaism “a gutter religion,” and worse. He has also called Obama both a “murderer” and an “assassin.”

None of that vile background bothered Berkeley . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=17264.)

Suffer Little Children

Suffer Little Children

The oft-misinterpreted phrase from Matthew 19:14 in the King James version of the Bible, “Suffer little children,” has taken on meanings in the world today far beyond excluding kids from hearing Christ’s words.

The precise quotation, “But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven,” has been adapted to everything from a short story by Stephen King to pop songs with entirely different connotations which are far more bothersome.

Kids are probably suffering more in 2011 than ever before for various reasons.

In addition to abortion statistics and the act of abortion itself which involves the ultimate suffering, death in the womb for babies before they get the opportunity to grow into children, there is other appalling evidence that fewer people really care about kids.

The disturbing values of some Muslim immigrants have compounded the already-distubed prevailing culture of devaluing human life in America and throughout the so-called civilized world. Both have contributed exponentially to childhood suffering.

Two stories out of England, one relating to atrocities in Liverpool, the other to one in Harlem, graphically illustrate the problem.

The Liverpool matter actually involves a combination of atrocious events–vicious and “endemic” gang rapes by Muslim men of young non-Muslim girls and a concerted effort by journalists to cover them up in the interests of discouraging “racists” and “fascists” and promoting “the development of social harmony and well-being.” (http://bit.ly/wU2QRx)

As Brits would say, What poppycock!

On January 3rd, eleven Muslim men–Abdul Aziz, Abdul Qayyum, Abdul Rauf, Adil Khan, Hamid Safi, Kabeer Hasan, Liaqat Hussain Shah, Mohammad Amin, Mohammad Sajid, Qamar Shahzad, and Shabir Ahmed–went on trial in Liverpool for the organized gang rapes.

According to an authoritative source and in accordance with the guidelines of Britain’s National Union of Journalists, NUJ, “You’ll not find a single reference to their crimes or their upcoming trial anywhere in the British media. Anywhere.”

The Koran condones Muslim men engaging in sexual intercourse with chattel, that is, with captive women and slave girls. With all the rights and privileges that have been accorded Muslims throughout Europe, they apparently feel nubile infidels are fair game, tantamount to captive slaves.

Almost worse, the British media obviously concurs since they won’t report to the public on the trial of the rapists. They apparently feel publicity would exacerbate native Britons’ justified fury over Muslim interlopers destroying their country, and their children.

Maybe when the daughter of a NUJ member is gangraped, NUJ rules will change. And maybe not.

Meanwhile, as young Liverpudlian girls and their European sisters in pain suffer at the hands of Muslims so, too, do Harlem youngsters suffer–with the qualification that the latter don’t seem to mind their suffering. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=12037.)

The Myth of the Sensitive, Tolerant Liberal

The Myth of the Sensitive, Tolerant Liberal

A popular misconception created by liberals, is that those dastardly conservatives are mean, nasty, and intolerant. The truth is precisely the opposite.

Little surprises me about liberal insensitivity and intolerance anymore even though some things they say, write, and do shock the conscience of anyone with a modicum of decency.

They have exhibited their true colors over the years, among other exhibitions castigating Sarah Palin for bearing in lieu of aborting her youngest child, calling Laura Ingraham a “talk slut,” ceaseless fat jokes about Chris Christie, and on and on and on.

However, nothing has better exposed liberals-leftists-Democrats for what they are than more recent examples of crude, insensitive intolerance toward Rick Santorum.

Following in the footsteps of such libs as Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Bill Maher et al., political commentator Alan Colmes feels free to launch viciously outrageous ad hominem salvos at conservatives and, like his fellow bomb-throwers, gets away with it.

Last Monday, Colmes’ hurled his latest insult at GOP presidential contender Santorum during a Fox News segment when he predicted the former Pennsylvania senator’s Iowa surge wouldn’t last.

That evaluation was reasonable though incorrect, the basis for his view was unreasonable and downright nasty.

Colmes speculated that voters would turn on Santorum as soon as they “get a load of some of the crazy things he’s said and done, like taking his two-hour-old baby when it died right after childbirth home and played with it so that his other children would know that the child was real.”

Rich Lowry rightly and promptly jumped all over Colmes for his “cheap shot” in disgracefully impugning both Santorum and his family and misinterpreting Santorum’s actions after the premature birth and sadly-abbreviated two-hour lifespan of baby Gabriel Santorum in 1996.

As John Hayward opined on HumanEvents.com, Colmes’ comment “wasn’t a random slip of the tongue” and was planned to demonstrate how proudly astute he is. Hayward observed that, “For an ostensibly ‘tolerant liberal,’ Colmes is deeply, disturbingly obsessed with cultivating intolerance for this unusual act of devotion.”

“Ostensibly” is the key word. For liberals, sensitivity and tolerance are reserved for people who would have aborted Gabriel instead of attempting to save his life.

That same twisted, restricted sense of “tolerance” extends to how liberals in the mainstream media in America and abroad react to expressions of Muslim faith as opposed to comparable Christian observances.

Basically in the liberal nutshell: Christians bad, Muslims good.

Denver Broncos’ quarterback, Tim Tebow, has been lambasted, ridiculed, and abused for what is termed, Tebowing, i.e. kneeling to thank God for his good fortune. Tebow, a committed Christian, pro-life, decent guy–all of which characteristics rankle liberals–feels it is his right and duty to publicly demonstrate his faith . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=12002.)

Good News from North Carolina, Alabama, and Ukraine

Good News from North Carolina, Alabama, and Ukraine

“Good news” is a very subjective term.

Some people regard the slight uptick in Barack Hussein Obama’s job approval ratings as a positive, others perceive it as ominous for the next election. Some consider unfortunate Tuesday’s Pentagon announcement that troops returning from Iraq won’t be honored with parades as per custom at the end of a war, others applaud the decision since they don’t like wars or soldiers.

What’s good and what’s bad often depends on one’s perspective.

However, though there are inevitably those who can find dark clouds on bright, sunny days and evil in virtue, various developments over recent weeks must be interpreted as positive–unless you’re a Muslim, a leftist, a misanthrope, or a sorry combination of all three.

For example, few Americans would see an American corporation standing up for American values as a negative. Even fewer would consider a decrease in a state’s unemployment numbers as anything but a sign of improving times. Virtually no one would deny saving children from an ugly fate is an act of true Christian charity.

Earlier this month, the Mooresville, North Carolina-headquartered home improvement chain Lowes home met with widespread criticism for yanking its advertising dollars from TLC’s “All-American Muslim,” apparently feeling the show was not representative of Muslims in America or of Islamic beliefs in Sharia law.

Muslims and leftist Democrat politicians ripped Lowes’ decision as a “shameful” reaction to intolerant “fringe” agitators and organized a boycott of the chain as punishment and to force Lowes to alter its policy.

In a letter to the company, signed by Muslim congressman Keith Ellison and others, the pols accused Lowes of forgetting “what it means to be an American.”

(See “Lowes Lowers Boom on Muslims,” http://bit.ly/rZNoTS.)

It seems the company knows full well what being an American means and “All-American Muslim” didn’t fill the bill.

Lowes stuck to its guns and was rewarded with a “BUYcott” by like-minded shoppers who flocked to its stores. At the same time, Lowes proved to be in the advertising vanguard: Fellow advertisers bailed in droves and ratings for TLC’s distorted view of the true nature and character of Muslims plummeted.

One small step for Lowes. One giant leap for America.

Much to the chagrin of the Obama administration, more good news emanated from the very red state of Alabama, employment news that can be credited to the Yellowhammer State and not to Washington.

Late last summer, Alabama began implementation of immigration reforms necessitated by Obamians’ refusal to enforce national immigration law and despite the administration’s efforts to discourage and interfere with Alabama doing the fed job.

Accused of violating everything from civil rights–of illegal aliens–to inflicting untold suffering–on illegal aliens–to ignoring economics in favor of politics, Alabama was following Arizona’s lead by audaciously insisting that applicants for jobs, etc. prove they are legal residents of the country and state.

In addition to the threatened, dire legal consequences of such audacity, progressive pundits and agitators predicted economic catastrophe for Alabamans. To their disappointment, the state has posted employment gains which far surpassed national averages since the new immigration law went into effect.

According to a November 18th report, unemployment rates fell at a record pace in the state, from September’s 9.8% to October’s 9.3%, from 9.9% to 9% in Etowah County, from 8.8% to 8.1% in Marshall county, and from 11.6% to 10.6% in DeKalb county.

The cause of all that good news? That same catastrophic immigration law which made jobs available to citizens and legal aliens who, we have been told by progressives for years, would absolutely never take those jobs.

The State of Alabama isn’t crowing much over outing the feds and the left as fools and liars and telling the president to stick those numbers in his hat, but it should.

Finally, from the usually sparse good news department comes this tidbit from ABCNews.com, a network which is usually engaged in presenting the opposite, and covering for Barack Obama. (Ever see any ABC reference Obama gaffes like “57 states,” “corpsemen,” or Hawaii’s location in Asia?)

Some positive stories cry out for exposure, even on ABC, and the Kecia and Kris Cox’s story is one of them.
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=11858.)

Revolting Muslims

Revolting Muslims

Islam, “The Religion of Peace,” has a peculiar approach to demonstrating the applicability of that description–unless firebombing a French newspaper, raping Norwegian women, and threatening and stabbing British MP’s are now condoned by the “Holy Prophet.”

Muslims have been revolting, in every sense of the word, for decades and not only during the Arab Spring. They are wreaking havoc throughout the Western world as well and the greatest irony in those upheavals is that the havoc is occurring in nations which welcomed them with open arms and open borders.

So much for misguided cultural diversity, so much for destructive multiculturalism, so much for fantasies of assimilation.

In France, Islamic terrorists showed their contempt for free speech by firebombing the offices of the leftist satirical publication Charlie Hebdo, (Charlie Weekly), in reaction to the weekly’s announced special edition to be titled, Sharia Hebdo “guest-edited” by none other than Muhammad, the “Holy Prophet” himself.

The editors had planned to satirize the first and probably last democratic Tunisian elections; Islamic sharia law was destined to become the dominant force in Tunisia and sharia has as much regard for democracy as it does for women. As for the proposed guest-editor, Muhammad had a great regard for war, mayhem, and his 8 year old child bride Aisha but “democracy” was a somewhat foreign concept to him.

It may have been an audacious idea for Charlie Hebdo and proved to be perilous as well when their office was hit with a Molotov cocktail and its website was hacked with a message criticizing irreverance toward “Islam’s almighty Prophet.”

Incidentally, one of America’s Leftist rags, Time magazine, chimed in on the fire bombing by attacking not the fire-bombers but Charlie Hebdo for “Islamophobic antics [which are] futile and childish.”

There may great sense of futility in Norway over its open invite to Muslims to come on over, become one of them, become a Norwegian, join their Nordic culture, and scrap their historic tendency for violence and the Qu’ran’s repugnance for and discrimination against the female gender.

The social experiment by ultra-liberal Norway isn’t working very well and the women of Oslo can attest to the fact that Muslim immigrants in Norway are far from childish. Brutal, violent, Muslim-ish, yes, childish, no.

A virtual rape-epidemic is in process in Oslo, already doubling 2010 incidents.

One member of the Norwegian Parliament, Oktay Dahl of the Conservative Party, risked a firebomb tossed by one of Norway’s new Muslim residents . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5902.)

When Israel Attacks

When Israel Attacks

It hasn’t been been an “if” for a long time and the “when” now appears imminent. The dilemma for the United States remains, When Israel launches its long-anticipated tactical strike at Iranian nuclear facilities, what will America do?

Despite being beset with economic upheaval and by endless threats from its other Muslim neighbors, it’s nevertheless a foregone conclusion that Israel will soon replicate the September 6th, 2007 attack on Syria’s al-Kibar nuclear weapons site which effectively ended the Assad regime’s pretensions of dominating the Mideast.

There is one significant difference between the al-Kibar strike by Israel’s IAF and the expected operation to eradicate Iran’s nuke capabilities, namely, al-Kibar preceded the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.

The latest news out of Washington is that the unilateralism-averse Obama administration has been pressuring the U.N. Security Council and the two permanent members who have opposed tougher sanctions, China and Russia, to support American initiatives intended to forestall a unilateral attack by Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Fat chance, as is the chance Israel will heed Obama’s importunings not to take out a growing and virtually-certain danger before it becomes an accomplished fact and much of the tiny Jewish state is decimated.

The latest news out of Tel Aviv is that Israel is developing ICBM capabilities and launched a test missile just two days after Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu again warned of the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program. Those ominous developments followed reports Netanyahu has been working to firm up his cabinet’s endorsement of a first strike.

Israel is preparing for war.

Given international and IAEA awareness of Iranian progress in both missile technology and nuclear capabilities, Iran’s persistent declarations of wiping Israel off the face of the map, and their most recent vow to inflict “heavy damages to the US as well as to the Zionist regime” in the event of a pre-emptive strike, that pre-emption is a certainty.

The only uncertainty is how the United States should react. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5877.)

Catholics, Crucifixes, and Muslims

Catholics, Crucifixes, and Muslims

Those darned papists are at it again!

It’s bad enough they established tens of thousands of Catholic elementary and high schools throughout America as alternatives to public school systems, a transparent affront to the quality of public education, but then they went and founded their own institutions of higher learning!

Now, their universities feel they have the right to display crucifixes and other fundamental symbols of Catholicism on their premises, thereby insulting, humiliating, and infuriating members of other faiths, particularly Muslims!

When will this madness end?

According to census.gov, there are over 4,000 colleges and universities in the United States in addition to 3,660 post-secondary vocational and technical institutions. Of that number, 244 are “Catholic.”

Regrettably, some of those 244 have become Catholic in name only, indeed only nominally-religious in any way. Among them is Georgetown University and the University of Notre Dame, both of which prestigious schools have “secularized” themselves in the interests of gaining acceptance as mainstream rather than being labelled “Catholic universities” which they seem to believe is a pejorative description.

In 2009, Georgetown invited avid abortion advocate President Barack Hussein Obama to speak at the school and accommodated his objections to the deeply-religious letters “IHS” (In Hoc Signo) by covering them during his speech. Georgetown observed the beginning of the holy season of Lent with “Sex Positive Week” featuring discussions on homosexuality and pornography with one hosted by a porn movie director.

For its secular part, Notre Dame abandoned the moral principles on which it was founded by proudly featuring the Abortionist in Chief as its 2009 commencement speaker despite widespread alumni and Catholic media condemnation. Notre Dame President Fr. John Jenkins won accolades from the liberal media even as he shamed the Irish and his religion.

(See “Apostate Universities,” http://tiny.cc/mxqsj.)

The one hundred twenty five year old Catholic University of America just outside Washington, D.C. hasn’t, as yet, totally succumbed to secularism and political correctness but that’s not due to a lack of effort by an infinitesimal if existent number of its student body, Muslims.

CU has seen a recent 100%+ spike in its Muslim population, from 41 in 2006 to 91 in 2011 out of a total of nearly 7,000 graduate and undergrad students. Life must be challenging for worshipers Of Allah and Muhammad in a Catholic institution . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5836.)
. . .

Explicating Pat Buchanan's "Suicide"

Explicating Pat Buchanan's "Suicide"

Pat Buchanan, former presidential candidate, adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, prolific author, and paleoconservative political commentator, knows whereof he speaks and writes. He has written a new book, a book deeply-disturbing to anyone who loves the United States of America and fears for our future.

Titled, Suicide of a Superpower, its subtitle, the question, Will America Survive to 2025? is even more disconcerting.

Scheduled to be officially released by Macmillan on October 18th, Drudge.com obtained a pre-publication copy of Suicide and outlined its contents which are not for the fainthearted. Or, for those smugly confident that, since America is the only superpower now and since we are the richest, most potent force on the planet, we will always be.

To anyone who has closely followed international and national developments over the course of the past few decades and especially of the last three years or even to casual observers, what Buchanan coalesces in the 496 pages of Suicide will strike many chords.

All the chords lead to the inexorable conclusion that the days of America’s greatness, if not to our days of existence as a nation, are numbered with very few numbers.

The Muslim world, which at this juncture stands to inherit what remains of Western civilization, will love Buchanan’s book. So, too, will the Left, which has been working tirelessly for decades to destroy the foundations of that civilization.

A few of the points noted by Buchanan, with this writer’s bracketed observations:

. We have created an totally dependent underclass ”who cannot cope” and who rely on government to provide their daily necessities. [I would add that they also cannot think. Testimony to both is the burgeoning welfare and food stamp programs and the fact that over 40% of Americans still support President Barack Hussein Obama.]

. Successful efforts to “de-Christianize” America and Europe “will prove culturally and socially suicidal,” as will the disintegration of Catholic schools and the abandonment by Catholic colleges and universities of Catholic principles on such issues as abortion. [Buchanan, a Roman Catholic, is right on the mark, not because Christians or Catholics are flawless but because ours was a Christian nation from its inception and because Catholics have been the primary advocates for the central moral issue of our time, the sanctity of life.]

. “White America is an endangered species,” . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5720.)

Proofs that Darwin Was Right: The Iraq-Iran Hikers

Proof that Darwin Was Right: The Iraq-Iran Hikers

The ”Darwin Award” is conferred on individuals who unknowingly gave their all in the inadvertent interests of preserving humanity’s gene pool by expiring in the process of committing acts of amazing stupidity and thereby removing themselves from the danger of further corrupting the genetic makeup of the human species.

Without referencing darwinism and the survival of the fittest, Spike TV features any number of deserving Darwin Awards winners on “1000 Ways to Die,” a ghoulish series on how people meet their Maker via wooden-headed choices.

Usually conferred posthumously, exceptions should be granted for giving a “Darwin” to the recently-released Iraq, (or was it Iran?) hikers.

Most Americans were delighted when Shane Bower and Josh Fattal were finally set free by the Iranians and were able to re-join fellow hiker Sarah Shourd on American soil after what the HuffingtonPost.com a 2-year “saga,” a term most often reserved to describe heroic adventures rather than idiotic blunders.

America may be desperate for heroes but Bower, Fattal, and Shourd hardly fit the bill.

In an impressive display of Islamic magnanimity toward a gender customarily stoned to death for much less grievous offenses than violating Iranian territorial integrity–and alleged spying–Shourd was released in 2010.

All three had been captured the year before as they blithely traversed the Iraq-Iran border since, apparently, the millions of acres of national parkland, untrammeled mountains, woods, and deserts available to hikers throughout the United States and other civilized countries held no attraction or opportunities for adventure.

Instead Bower, Fattal, and Shourd chose what they believed to be Iraq’s Kurdish region, . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5563.)

Musings on the Ugly Beauty of the World Trade Center

Musings on the Ugly Beauty of the World Trade Center

Let’s face it, the World Trade Center, actually a complex of seven buildings with the centerpieces the towers which once stood majestically in Lower Manhattan, wasn’t exactly an architectural beauty.

They were even called ugly.

The two primary towers, one rising to 1,368 feet, the other to 1,362feet, dominated the landscape and were a source of boundless pride and tributes to the supremacy of American commerce for politicians and builders even as most New Yorkers regarded them as impressive but essentially unattractive oblong boxes reaching into the skies.

My family and I visited the World Trade Center in 1988 along with an aged uncle from Ireland. My uncle, terrified of heights, stood petrified against the back wall of the Top of the World observatory and understatedly remarked that the view was “very nice.”

Soaring a full hundred feet above the Empire State Building, the WTC did indeed provide a “very nice” panorama, remarkable, breathtaking views for miles in every direction, in fact, even if the design of the towers was less than pleasing. Those vistas and the pride New Yorkers and all Americans felt for the World Trade Center fully compensated for the towers’ stark severity, described by one architect as “glass-and-metal filing cabinets.”

Despite all their architectural and aesthetic flaws, I still miss the strange, symmetrical elegance of those “filing cabinets” and, despite the passage of ten years, I freely admit that I still weep over the events of September 11th, 2001.

None of us could have anticipated the devastation wreaked on America by Islamic terrorists on that brilliantly-bright morning.

What happened that day didn’t simply involve the destruction of of human life and of buildings. It didn’t merely represent a shocking, unprovoked attack on our homeland. It involved much more than the resultant phenomenal costs, disruptions, and upheavals.

Obviously, the greatest loss was the 2,753 lives snuffed out but not to be forgotten either was the loss of Americans’ illusory senses of invulnerability and indestructibility, the loss of our collective national innocence.

Those attributes were barely shaken by the failed Muslim attempt to knock down the towers in 1993 primarily because they failed. Eight years later they succeeded. What could never happen, happened.

The incomprehensibility of 9/11 was perhaps best illustrated in the reaction of a WTC survivor. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5387.)

Libya--the Mideast Cuba?

Libya--the Mideast Cuba?

I was just a teenager back in 1959 but I can still recall the great hullabaloo, predominantly positive hulabaloo, over Fidel Castro, with the media referring to him as the “George Washington of Cuba” and exulting over their darling’s victory over the evil Fulgencio Batista, with teachers all a-bubble with excitement since Cuba was finally free.

Not only was Batista, El Hombre, a dictator but he had illegally seized power, had consorted with gamblers and known criminals, and suffered from the severe liability (to American leftists) of being friendly toward the United States.

Similar to the 2008 hype for Barack Hussein Obama, his successor, Fidel Castro was hailed a a savior, a man of the people who would bring joy and prosperity to his island nation. Fidel couldn’t quite walk on water as Obama could but he seemed to share most other Obama qualities and oratorical skills, sans teleprompters.

Not known at the time, with the able assistance of his fellow Marxist revolutionary, Che Guevara, Fidel would imprison and murder tens of thousands of his countrymen, come close to initiating World War III, and reduce Cuba to an economic basket case.

An added bonus for leftist Castrophiles is that, unlike Batista, Fidel hates America.

Although they may not smoke cigars because Islam and Allah frown on tobacco products, the Libyan rebels now on the verge of deposing Muammar Khadaffi and hopefully doing unto him what Iraqis did unto Saddam Hussein may very well turn out to be far worse for U.S. interests than both “mad dog of the Middle East” and the mad dog of the Caribbean.

Khadaffi was certainly not one of America’s best buddies and continued to support international Islamic terrorism yet he, allegedly, abandoned his efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction in 2003, after America massively visited mass destruction on Afghanistan and Hussein’s regime.

Nevertheless, “The devil you know . . . ” and Libyan rebel devils may soon make the United States yearn for the good, old Muammar days.

Our president, peace-lover that he is, refused to concede that our war in Libya was even a war.

The White House opted to describe the conflict as a “kinetic military action” while we kinetically led NATO forces against Khadaffi loyalists, launched hundreds of kinetic Tomahawk cruise missiles against Tripoli and loyalist strongholds, and gave Syria’s equally-treacherous Bashar al-Assad a free pass.

You see, war bad, kinetic military action good in Obamaese. As for Assad, the Obamians haven’t a clue what to do.

Like Fidel Castro who was deemed good contrasted with Fulgencio Batista, the Libyan rebels are likewise considered the good guys compared to Khadaffi. Like Castro, they are likely to bite America on its collective arse, only more severely. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5353.)

Iranian, ESPN, and Collegiate Fruitcakes

Iranian, ESPN, and Collegiate Fruitcakes

The humorist Will Rogers is famous for saying, among other things, ”I never met a man I didn’t like.”

I feel certain Rogers was speaking generally and wasn’t excluding the fair sex when he said that, just as sure as I am that he had never met certain Iranian Muslims, ESPN producers, and Goshen College President John Brenneman, all of whom are eminently dislikable for various reasons and all of whom are certifiable fruitcakes, dependent, of course, on one’s definition of a “fruitcake.”

I’m not attempting here to further demean almost universally-despised, Christmas fruitcakes. I’m referring to loonies, people who have earned universal disapprobation via violent hypocrisy, (Iranian Muslims), racial agitation, (ESPN), or downright stupidity, (Brenneman).

The Iranians sort of have an excuse for being fruitcakes, sort of, since their duly-elected leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, virtually defines the term. Nevertheless, Islamic Iranian clerics have now outdone themselves in outlandish fruitcakery by seizing and burning every bible in their sorry land or, at least, every bible they can get their grubby hands on.

Still not recovered from the Crusades, which ended 720 years ago, Iran’s Mohabut News is reporting that Iran’s Ayatollah Hadi Jahangosha is worried about “the spread of Christianity among our youth” as disseminated by Christian satellite television and books, principally that nastiest of all books, the Bible.

Ayatollah Jahangosha doesn’t seem concerned a whit over Iran’s nuke program or his nation’s rogue status in the world or supplying weapons to every Muslim nut in the Mideast or promoting worldwide war or eradicating Israel but Christians are a problem. Reflecting his paranoia, the Islamic Republic of Iran is seizing and burning every Bible they can. (http://bit.ly/nSJnZs)

Someone should remind the good cleric of how upset Muslims were over an American pastor burning a few holy Korans last year. Maybe Pastor Jones didn’t burn enough of them?

Quite a few people are upset over ESPN’s coloring NFL quarterback Michael Vick white.

Vick was convicted and jailed for staging and engaging in dog-fighting, a bloody “sport” in which man’s best friends were trained to maim and kill other best friend’s for man’s entertainment.

Whether to mitigate Vick’s offenses, to stir the racial pot, or just to get viewers to tune in, ESPN created a digital mock-up of the African-American Vick as a white man . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5301)

Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī

Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī

You may say Khadafy or Kadaffie and I may say Qadafi or Gadaffie but “Daffy” is definitely not an acceptable or applicable nickname for Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi, in Arabic مُعَمَّر القَذَّافِي‎ Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī, the Libyan despot, butcher of Libyans, mad dog of the Mideast, murderer of untold numbers of defenseless Americans and Europeans.

Mu, as I will refer to him since I refuse to pay him any respect by repetitively typing Muʿammar al-Qaḏḏāfī is or was anything but daffy. Treacherous, vile, and peculiar yes, but daffy, no; he is or was as wily as a snake, as calculating as Barack Obama. Those alternative present and past tense verbs are necessitated by the fact no one knows as of the time of this writing whether he is alive or if he has already been killed like Obama killed another Muslim terrorist, Usama bin laden.

The only certainty right now, should Mu be in the welcoming arms of Allah, is that Obama with the assistance of Seal Team Six didn’t get him and it’s improbable that he screamed the Islamic war cry, “Alahu akbar!” before Libyan rebels chopped him up for dog food.

Arabs don’t especially like dogs.

It’s doubtful, too, that Mu will get his 72–or 50 virgins in paradise, depending on who’s counting–after he passes to the Great Islamic Beyond because Allah generally reserves that select group of toothless hags for true Muslim heroes and Mu is/was anything but heroic. Killing Christians and other infidels is one thing to Allah. Killing his fellow Muslims which Mu did with a bloody vengeance is quite another in the Islamic playbook.

Whatever Mu’s ultimate fate, a safe bet is that America’s current president will attempt to claim at least a degree of . . .
(Read more at . . . http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5262)

Pederasty and Pedophilia Codified by the APA

Pederasty and Pedophilia Codified by the APA

In case no one has noticed, there seems to be an inordinate interest in celebrities and in pedophilia on the internet. Information on Hollywood and its “stars” has long attracted attention but the pedo attraction has long been confined to fans of sick porno websites.

Not anymore.

On the day I posted “Hooray for Hollywood Pedophiles?” (http://bit.ly/r95ILx), concerning a Corey Feldman expose’ on rampant perversion involving “vultures” in Tinseltown who prey on child actors, traffic to this blogsite increased by almost 400%, not indisputable evidence of widespread popularity of my site but clear proof that all lecherous vultures aren’t in the movie-making biz.

It’s now come to light that the perversion is not confined to Hollywood–as if it ever were.

A highly prestigious medical organization is in process of endorsing, normalizing, and seeking to legalize grossly abnormal and currently illegal acts of adults having sex with children.

The pederastic National Association of Man/Boy Love Association, NAMBLA, and the former homosexual Obama administration “Safe Schools” czar, Kevin Jennings, must be positively ecstatic over the move by the American Psychiatric Association, the APA.

Though still regarded as the virtual bible of shrinks, said APA terminally discredited itself and its DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, almost 40 years ago when it caved under unrelenting pressure from homosexuals to revise the DSM and change its diagnosis of homosexuality from “an abnormal mental disorder” to, well, just a matter of inclinational taste.

(See “Nature or Nurture,” http://bit.ly/pr6dfb, as well as various other pieces on the subject of the APA and how it has transformed psychiatry into pop-science on demand. It’s entirely plausible that the same disordered group which pressured the APA into altering a long-established diagnosis in 1973 now controls the APA.)

It wouldn’t be a stretch to believe that retreat from defending and defining normality to normalizing abnormality may very well represent one of the primary bases for the Western world’s disintegration, a moral disintegration to complement our economic and societal decline.

In 2011, under a somewhat different, also politically-correct pressure, the APA has caved once again.

This time the shrinks in charge are striving to accommodate Muslim inclinations to bugger kids . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5246)

Breivik vs. Hasan and Abdo, Patriotic vs. Treasonous Terrorism

Breivik vs. Hasan and Abdo, Patriotic vs. Treasonous Terrorism

Anders Behring Breivik, the accused murderer of 76 people in Oslo and on the island of Utoya, will have unique advantages if and when he ever comes to trial. He will not be subject to American law or our penal system but instead to far less punitive Norwegian law and a maximum sentence of 21 years in a prison which more closely resembles a Club Med resort.

As an article in PajamasMedia.com observed, the Norwegian mass murderer faces a “Gentle Justice,” the Nordic belief being, “If you treat people badly, they will behave badly. Anyone can be a citizen if we treat them well, respect them, and give them challenges and demands.” (http://bit.ly/nYi1Vc)

Norway’s is an operable philosophy only if the citizenry and inmate population adhere to civilized principles and only when predicated on extended experience with immigrant influxes, which homogeneous Norway is not. Their system of “gentle justice” presupposes civil criminals and has yet to be tested on a wide scale.

Norway considers itself very progressive when it comes to punishment and in many other ways, including not permitting most of its police force to carry lethal weapons since Nordic countries don’t want people to get hurt.

In a very real sense, Breivik deserves better treatment than America’s homegrown lowlives.

As reprehensible as his murderous spree was, Breivik committed his atrocities out of a love for his country, albeit a distorted love but love nevertheless. He detested his exceedingly benevolent, socialistic Labor government for its immigration policies and, more specifically, for undermining Norway’s national integrity and culture by welcoming and indulging hordes of Muslim immigrants.

In America, we have a similar approach. We welcome and indulge large scale multiculturalism and diversity–and we’re reaping the whirlwind as a result.

In custody are Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army major who allegedly slaughtered 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009, and Naser Jason Abdo, who apparently was plotting to become a Hasan wannabe. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5131)

Welcome to the Real World, Oslo!

Welcome to the Real World, Oslo!

With the still-developing news of a horrific car bombing in Oslo and the mindless slaughter of teenagers at Utoya, Jeremiah Wright might say that Norwegian chickens have come home to roost, except that the Norwegian chickens haven’t launched what Wright would call unprovoked wars and the Norden nations have been damned generous beyond comprehension with their influx of Islamic immigrants.

Preliminary reports indicate at least 9-10 people were killed, 15 injured in the explosion at the Norwegian prime minister’s Oslo office but many victims are still trapped in the rubble. An additional eighty, some trying to swim away for their lives, were murdered by a gunman masquerading as a police officer at the Labor Party youth camp in apparently coordinated attacks.

The coordinators seem to have been Islamic jihadists: “A terror group, Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or the Helpers of the Global Jihad, issued a statement claiming responsibility for the attack, . . . The message said the attack was a response to Norwegian forces’ presence in Afghanistan and to unspecified insults to the Prophet Muhammad.” (http://nyti.ms/o6sfMI)

Peace-loving Norway maintains a very minimal presence in the War on Terror and in the Afghanistan war so the chief causes of the attacks must are clearly those “unspecified insults to the Prophet,” or a reflection of the insanity of Islamic militants. They did it because they could and they needed no further excuse than their jihad. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5064)

Recent White House Deceptions: Transcripts, Dreams, and Muslims

Recent White House Deceptions: Transcripts, Dreams, and Muslims

In our high-speed Internet, our 24/7 cable news age, we tend to get complacent insofar as the news and information we’re getting, innocently believing that what we’re seeing and hearing is substantially everything that’s out there, that it’s relatively accurate and reliable.

That ain’t necessarily so, especially when the news and information relate to the White House and its current residents.

Cases in point: White House transcripts which aren’t transcripted as much as they are scripted, the nightmarish Dream Act which seemed dead yet is very much alive, and the prosecution of Muslim terrorists who may very well be merely misunderstood conscientious objectors. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4876)