This is the 3rd and last of three guest posts I did for Ladd Ehlinger’s site back in late 2011.  I’m reprinting them here (With Ladd’s permission) because I think the election of Donald Trump is a significant event in the culture wars and these posts (and the follow ups that I intend to write) serve to explain what happened to our friends on the left who are still pulling out their hair over the events of November.  While Ladd’s old blog isn’t there you can find the original piece via the wayback machine.

“In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators.”-

William F. Buckley Jr. Up from Liberalism.

One of the most important aspects of the culture wars as fought via cinema is the concept of challenging the status quo with subtlety. One might make a statement with The Crying Game and be assured of critical acclaim, but in order to effect change to society in general, one has to be able to influence those who would not be caught dead watching that kind of movie. To win your case, you need to play on the other person’s field.

Oh, God is an interesting example of this. It is the last movie you would think of as part of a culture war fight and if you did, you would consider it a conservative movie.

Jerry Landers (John Denver) is an assistant Manager at a supermarket who gets a typewritten note announcing he has an interview with God. He laughs it off until the note he threw away keeps turning up. When he finds it during a visit by his district manager (David Ogden Stiers) under a leaf of romaine lettuce, he visits the interview location on the note. There he finds an empty room on the 27th floor of a building with only 17 floors and a voice on an intercom saying it is God. He tries to dismiss it, but finds the message repeated on his broken radio. After his wife (Teri Garr) notes he has not actually seen God, God (George Burns) visits in person while he is in the shower telling him he’s been chosen to deliver the message that he exists and everything in the world can work out, it’s all up to us.

When rejected by the LA Times religious reporter, (George Furth) God reappears and at Jerry’s request performs a small miracle by making it rain inside his car. Still wet, he returns at once to the Times, and they run a small story on the subject. He wife tries to deflect attention, but eventually it’s picked up by a local paper, then an ABC affiliate. When warned by a company executive, Mr. Summers, (William Daniels) to keep his mouth shut. he continues on, finally appearing on the Dinah Shore show. That draws all kind of cranks and fanatics to his house and creates a lot of trouble for him.

A telegram from the local university asking him to appear before a board of religious experts to hear about his claim seems like a chance to save his job. The panel, which represents Jewish, Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Protestant clergy, including a loud televangelist, Reverend Williams, (Paul Sorvino) finds insufficient evidence but as a control measure give him 50 questions (written in Aramaic) that they ask God to answer.

Landers agrees and is locked in his hotel room with no outside communication. God shows up as a busboy bringing Ketchup and remarking that $11 is a lot for a steak. He answers the questions and when finished tells Jerry to give them to Reverend Williams saying: “You take these answers and give them to Reverend big mouth and you say that tell him God says he’s a phony and also tell him if he wants to get rich, fine, tell him to sell earth shoes, but personally tell him I’d like him to shut up.”

The Reverend is delighted at the prospect that God sent Jerry to him, until he repeats what God said on a microphone. The scene immediately shifts to a courtroom where Williams’ attorney (Ralph Bellamy) demands damages. Jerry refuses both the Judge’s (Barnard Hughes) suggestion for council and his wife’s entreaties to apologize.

When he presents his case, Jerry calls God to the stand. When he doesn’t immediately appear, Jerry argues that there was a hesitation in the room. A possibility that God would appear exists, and he claims it is the benefit of the doubt he deserves. As the judge considers contempt charges, God appears, taking the stand.

He rebukes the Reverend’s Lawyer, noting that nobody had a problem believing in the devil after “that movie” (The Exorcist). He confirms all Jerry has said and offers a miracle to prove who he is by making a deck of cards appear and disappear, and finally making himself vanish during an exchange with the judge and those in the courtroom.

The tape recording, however, didn’t record God’s voice nor does the stenotype machine show any of his words. The judge rules given their common experience it’s understandable that he would consider his actions divinely commanded and drops the slander charge, but rules due to the lack of evidence that God did not appear in the courtroom.

Jerry loses his job, and on the drive home God tells him he did a good job saying “There are other cities and other supermarkets”. When Jerry asks if sometimes they can just talk God replies: “You talk I’ll listen,” and walks away into the sunset, disappearing.

It’s a feel good movie all around. The performances are excellent, John Denver is totally believable as Jerry Landers, helped by a good performance by Teri Garr as his wife and a cast chock full of some of the best character actors out there from William Daniels, to Jeff Corey and Ralph Bellamy. Add two actors who were yet to have their greatest impact–Paul Sorvino and David Ogden Stiers, punctuated of course by George Burns, who carries off the role with perfect timing and style. What’s there not to like about this movie? You have a nice conservative message about an unbeliever who hears the word of God and follows it, an affirmation of the importance of following God’s word no matter what, and the message that following God is not without cost.

If you look deeper, however, you will find some interesting messages hidden delivered with such skill that you might miss it, if you didn’t look.

First let’s contrast the “believers” and the “unbelievers”. At the very start, we have Landers established as a good man who gently corrects his staff and is too honest to “oil his cukes,” as the district rep. suggests to make the cucumber display more appealing to the eye. He opposition is a myriad of believers, from his wife “I believe in God, I just don’t think he exists” skeptical religious editors, a CEO who resents him speaking to God, a set of religious nuts, and finally a classic stereotype televangelist with sheep-like followers who doesn’t even believe in God when he sees him. Jerry has “the strength that comes from knowing” but none of them that have not seen are willing to believe. The message: “believers” are either nuts or phonies and so are you unless you’ve seen it for yourself.

The other believers are the religious panel and they are passed over. Other than Rev. Williams, we don’t see the rest of the panel’s reaction to the questions answered in Aramaic. It’s as if they don’t exist, because of course their reaction would not produce the cynicism required for the movie’s climax and would more likely be: “My Lord and my God.”

Let’s look at “God” in this film. In the very first encounter we establish a God “makes mistakes”, in his first physical appearance he proclaims that “shame” is wrong. He is not all knowing “I haven’t a clue” and his reaction to prayer is “I can’t help hearing.” It could as easily be: “Why are you bothering me?”

Now that we’ve abolished the concept of God as understood for centuries, what does he think about right and wrong? He objects to “killing”, pollution and making money in his name, but that’s about it. Take a look at the answer to the big question of the movie:

“Is Jesus Christ the son of God? Jesus was my son, Buddha was my son, Mohammad, Moses You the man who said there was no room at the inn was my son and so is the one who charges $11 dollars for a steak in this one.”

Now, I wouldn’t expect Carl Reiner to give an endorsement to Christianity, but note what he does. All religions are equal, all are valid, there is no “truth”, none of that “Thou shalt have no other Gods but me” stuff. The generic answers given by the “God” in this movie could be, and is given by new age gurus of today who makes the same kind of money that the Reverend Williams does.

No truth, no worship, you don’t need prayer, just know I’m here but I really don’t matter and have nothing to do about it, so unless you are the ’69 Mets, the last miracle God in the movie says he did, don’t bother asking. It’s so simple, the message of Oh, God becomes: “People don’t really don’t need a God”, but that message is delivered in a way so subtle and so discreet that unless someone points it out you can’t see yourself absorbing it.

This is the first of three guest posts I did for Ladd Ehlinger’s site back in late 2011.  I’m reprinting them here (With Ladd’s permission) because I think the election of Donald Trump is a significant event in the culture wars and these posts (and the follow ups that I intend to write) serve to explain what happened to our friends on the left who are still pulling out their hair over the events of November.  While Ladd’s old blog isn’t there you can find the original piece via the wayback machine.

“The trouble is you don’t want a man for a husband! You want a coward who will run out on his friends! Well, that’s not me, never was, and never will be. I don’t care how much I love you! And I do very much. I’m a soldi… I mean I’m a man first!”

gungadinposterEven a person with a casual knowledge of movies knows the number 1 movie of 1939, because “Gone with the Wind”is the highest grossing movie of all time. If you asked them what picture was number 2 that year, odds are they haven’t heard of RKO’s “Gunga Din”.

A 70 year old action picture is unlikely to generate a lot of interest from the denizens of the CGI-YouTube era and with the left practically owning film studios, a period piece depicting the British Empire suppressing a murderous cult in colonial India is not going to be high on the view lists of professors.

This is a shame because it’s a movie that deserves attention from viewers, not only for conservative themes, but on its technical merits, historical influence, strong cast and the story itself.

First, one can’t watch this movie without seeing shades of pictures from “Indiana Jones” to “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid”. When viewed by the unaware, the reaction is much like that of a teen who has watched “Family Guy”for years who sees the opening of “All in the Family” for the first time.

Second, consider the scale of the film. Over and over you see groups of hundreds of men in formation, both marching and on horseback with great sweeping views over spectacular landscapes. For people used to CGI it’s quite a change to see real people and real animals reacting in real ways. This is 1939. What we would call “computers” were two to six years in the future and where they would exist was the size of Cuba. If you wanted a shot of a group of men charging on horseback, you needed…a group of men charging on horseback, if you wanted an incredible background vista, you either had to have incredible background paintings, or actually shoot at a such a location. And a fall off a roof meant someone actually had to take that fall or you needed good modeling. For the modern filmmaker or student used to manipulating massive groups with a click of a mouse, the concept of having to control hundreds of men and animals for a shot is way above their pay grade.

Third, check out this cast: Douglas Fairbanks Jr.; a legendary name who, in a few short years after this film would match his on screen valor in actual combat. Victor McLaglen; a two time Oscar winner who had faced two heavyweight champions in the ring and fought in Iraq before he ever appeared in front of a camera, and Cary Grant, acknowledged as one of the greatest actors who ever lived. Talk about holding three aces in a hand.

Finally there is the story, and what a story: After a patrol and a village drops off the map a force is needed to repair the telegraph lines and investigate. Three sergeants freshly pulled from a brawl are assigned to lead the party which includes a regimental bhisti (water bearer) named Gunga Din. While the troops begin repairing the line at the village the sergeants start searching the village and come across some suspicious characters whose arrest is a prelude to an ambush.

After a running fight the sergeants get their surviving troops out and report. Their commanding officer recognizes a captured weapon as a sign of the murderous thuggee cult that the British had suppressed decades ago (funny how things like the thuggee cult, the slave trade, Caribbean piracy and Suttee were all suppressed only by the actions of those evil colonial Brits)

A new advance force is prepared sans Ballantine, (Fairbanks Jr.) who is due to marry and leave the army in six days. In a hilarious scene, Cutter (Grant) & MacChesney (McLaglen) manage to temporarily incapacitate his replacement forcing Ballantine into the expedition. When they reach the village and set camp, Cutter, after being locked up to prevent it, sets off to find a temple of gold that Din, (Sam Jaffe) who dreams of being the company bugler, has told him is nearby. Din and Cutter find the temple beyond a mountain pass which turns out to be the base of a thuggee army they are looking for led by the cult leader (well played by Eduardo Ciannelli). Cutter prepares to send Din back to get with the exit blocked deliberately gets himself captured to clear the way.

With the prospect of his friend in deadly danger, MacChesney sets off with Din after him. Ballantine, end of enlistment or not, insists on joining them over the entreaties of his fiance. (Joan Fontaine, the only cast member still alive). They blunder right into the Guru’s trap hoping to lure the regiment to an ambush in the pass.

The following passages contain major spoilers, if you don’t wish to know how the movie ends, skip the following two paragraphs.

The heroes manage by means of a ruse to grab the guru and find themselves in a Mexican standoff that persists until the guru, after a speech that could have been made by any of the heroes in the pictures, sacrifices himself in order to allow the attack to go forward. With their hostage gone the thuggees take the Brits, bayonetting both Din and Cutter in the process.

The thuggees ignore the wounded Cutter and Din and drag Ballantine & MacChesney to the edge of the parapet to watch the ambush of their regiment. As the guards concentrate on their impending victory, Din, still bleeding from his wounds with bugle in hand slowly climbs to the top of the temple dome and blows “stand to arms”. He is shot down but he manages it long enough for the regiment to deploy, avoiding the trap and allowing the army to rout the thuggees. Din is given a hero’s burial and posthumously made a regimental corporal listed “on the rolls of our honored dead.”

Through the entire picture manly virtue is celebrated: It’s celebrated when the survivors of the first battle, after an arduous trek bearing their wounded, form to march into the camp parade in good order. It’s celebrated as Din, with Cutter’s support, dreams of being a soldier instead of a water bearer. It’s celebrated when Cutter allows himself to be taken so Din can give warning. Ballantine refuses to leave his friend in the lurch even for the woman he loves. Cutter and MacChesney endure torture, Din gives his life to warn the regiment, and even the villain of the piece sacrifices himself in the hope of victory for his cause.

These manly values are not only conservative values, but are instinctive human values that since 9/11 the left has been unable to suppress. It certainly isn’t matched by the left protestors who cry oppression if they are evicted from other people’s property at little personal risk.

But what about colonial cultural inequality? I’m glad you asked, let’s look at the first battle scene again.

While the men are repairing the telegraph wires (and given water by Gunga Din) the sergeants search the village for clue to what happened. Ballantine finds a first a single man then a group he is trying to conceal. When they fail to convince him they are poor villagers who survived the raid, one tries to jump him. He finds himself in an outnumbered brawl. Cutter and MacChesney enter, and rather than drawing weapons join in the brawl till the men are subdued. Our politically correct friends might point to this one might question one European handling a group alone, but only if they didn’t pay attention to the larger British group they handled at the film’s start. When they fail to provide adequate answers, they prepare to take them back when the leader lets out a cry signaling a group of snipers on rooftops to fire and a wave of riders to pounce upon them.

The entire British force other than the sergeants consists of Indian troops, yet nowhere in the scene from the start to the end is there any sense that these troops are different than any other. They fight as a unit, throughout the running battle and retreat through and over the rooftops the town against overwhelming odds. The sergeants lead from the front, take the biggest risks and you will note are the last to make the jump that predated Redford and Newman’s by 30 years. Just before the last of them jumps, he checks on a fallen private soldier to see if he’s can be saved, and when the survivors march into camp, they march in together with heads held high.

There was a time when this message was the norm, and it’s not a coincidence that it was also the time of the greatest generation. When we ceded the culture wars we ceded our message, the message of Judeo Christian values, the message of a shared culture and belief in not only right and wrong but what makes a culture and a people thrive as our forefathers did. If we are unwilling to fight the culture wars by supporting our own cultural message, then we need to remember those who already did so effectively in years gone by.

Today on DaTechGuy on DaRadio we talk Twinkies and with Film Director Ladd Ehlinger about how cultural issues play in the political world.

Until we fight on the cultural playground we are going to have a hard time steering the conversation, particularly among the low information voters that gave Obama their win.

As always we want to hear from you, give us a call at 508-438-0965 or 888-9-FEDORA

And if you are outside our 50,000 Watt Range you have a lot of streaming options.

You can listen live using the three different links for the WCRN live stream
If you are using Windows media player click here
If you are using Winamp clip here
If you are using real player click here

If you are using something else, then go to Tune-in.

See you there.

One of the things that I’ve been suggesting the “Swatter” needs to turn states evidence NOW because the higher ups in Kimberlin & Co will drop him like a wet blanket when the heat gets turned up. Well guess what, somebody is turning on the stoves:

Item: Follow the Connections:

One of the things that people have been wondering have been why Democrats have been so willing to back people like Kimberlin. It doesn’t seem to make sense, well as Stacy McCain continues to peel the onion looks what turns up:

In attempting to discover the identity of “Randy Hahn,” the #StopRush boycott leader Shoq sought the services of Democrat consultant Neal Rauhauser, the e-mails obtained by The Trenches show. Rauhauser provided the group with extensive documentation about a Houston man named Jason, whose surname was redacted in the version posted by Bayne. Rauhauser then mused about exposing the man to harassment by sending his personal information to online groups.

“I have been sorely tempted to point him out to various actors — a guy like this, he could really produce some high quality entertainment for 4chan, Something Awful, Encyclopedia Dramatica, etc.,” Rauhauser wrote in his e-mail reply to Shoq.

Note we are talking an MSNBC host, and the Stop Rush movement (which Media Matters has been highly involved with this). Stacy continues to find connections higher and higher up the food chain and as things go on, the question becomes, how high can you go?

Item: Habit forming.

In a previous article Stacy McCain quoted a 2000 word scrubbed piece by Neal Rauhauser. That piece in addition to being all about hiding themselves from the law had some rather solid insights on how one identifies a person hiding behind an online identity

You have habits that include:
The time(s) of day you are active
The language you speak
The situational knowledge you have when interacting with a certain group
The software you prefer to use

I thought of this when I saw this post at Patterico:

The Gaped Crusader published a picture of a naked man and said it was me; wrote posts about my wife; published my home address; and generally made it explicitly clear that Kimberlin and Rauhauser were out to intimidate and harass folks like SWATting victim Mike Stack, me (another SWAtting victim), and Kimberlin critics Aaron Walker, Seth Allen, and Mandy Nagy.

The Gaped Crusader is a critical link between the harassment SWATting victims and an associate of Kimberlin’s.

And the Gaped Crusader is tied to Neal Rauhauser through far more than the indentation quirk above. He is also tied through subject matter obsession; quirks of language; admissions regardings recent trips . . . and an IP address.

These habits along with some odder ones are making it easier and easier to actually identify what these people have been doing and that becomes important when you consider this:

Item: The Bloggers Counterattack!

The Kimberlin guys have (among other tactics) been using lawfare to go after bloggers well turnabout is fair play:

Our first salvo in that effort has been to file a federal lawsuit today against Brett Kimberlin, seeking, in part, an injunction to prevent the state from ever again arresting Mr. Aaron Walker, an American citizen, for exercising his right to free speech, and to release him from any prior censorship restrictions imposed by unlawful judgements.

This is only the first step in what we call the “Bloggers Defense Team.” We are firmly committed to exposing and combating the efforts of Brett Kimberlin, otherwise known as the Speedway Bomber, and his well-funded allies on the left (like George Soros and Barabara Streisand) who will use any means of harassment to silence political opposition.

and the group that is doing it DB Capitol Strategies and RightSolutions are doing it well

-We plan on spending less than twenty percent of contributions on administration costs. The remainder will be spent on legal fees, lawyers, researchers, and investigators.
-In the coming days, we will create a website dedicated specifically to the effort to provide important news and information, copies of filings, and more.
-Provide monthly statements on expenditures and contributions on that website.
-Form a publicly disclosed “advisory panel” of bloggers, and disclose the methods and reasonings for that panel and those that have been included (we will also welcome suggestions).

This effort has gotten a lot of attention on the net. Combine with the efforts of the NBC on Walkers behalf and the story becoming known to Senators and Congressmen this is going to end up bad news for the left, particularly during an election year when these guys are going to be throwing anything that might weigh the down off their deflating Obama balloon.

This is not going to end well legally for Kimberlin & Co.

Update: Stacy includes two updates that are very significant, the first being a denial from attorney Imani Gandy that tells an interesting story:

How do we know that the story was legit? The proof is in the statement issued this week to The Trenches by attorney Imani Gandy.

Gandy was eager to disavow having been closely involved with the “Stop Rush” leadership, and similarly eager to deny having anything to do with the recorded phone call. Why this eagerness? Because if Shoq was in Florida when he recorded that call, the recording would be illegal under Florida law and, as Gandy is a lawyer, it would be a clear-cut ethics violation for her to be complicit in such a crime.

Yet in the process of making those denials, Gandy ended up confirming the authenticity of both the recording and the e-mails published by The Trenches — and this is important why?

Because (a) it confirms that my reporting is accurate, (b) this has the collateral effect of confirming Rauhauser’s involvement with the “Stop Rush” boycotters

That in itself is huge as it suggests the “distancing” has already begun in his second post he linked to a piece I first saw via the Lonely Conservative at Screed of Momus titled: A Conversation with Nancy. Nancy is the ex wife of Neal Rauhauser which includes this significant tidbit:

And when Neal and Nancy divorced, Neal’s antics were sufficiently disturbing enough to result in a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation. What the psychiatrist found was a man who was deeply disturbed, possessed of the worst narcissism he’d ever seen. Neal had reactive attachment disorder. He was sociopathic, and his behavior resulted in Neal facing various difficulties socially and professionally. Today, from what we’ve seen of Neal and his behavior online, the pathologies fit. The grandiosity, the unlimited ambition, the delusional sense of self-importance, and the inability to tolerate or endure any personal criticism as an individual, or any personal criticism directed at those whom Neal considers to be allies, all fit with Neal’s current and past idiopathic behavior. Only it really isn’t idiopathic, because Neal has acted like this for some time.

Hmmm this would seem to fit with what Stacy McCain has been saying right along who hypothetically asks:

Suppose there was a certain person (we’ll call him “UnSub”) who knew himself to be implicated in serious crimes. Suppose that UnSub displayed an obsessive interest in secrecy and deception. Furthermore, suppose that UnSub believed himself to be under investigation.

How would such a person behave? Is it possible — and I’m just throwing this out there, as a hypothetical possibility — that UnSub would attempt to deflect attention from himself by making accusations of wrongdoing against others? Would UnSub try to destroy or conceal potential evidence? Could we, perhaps, expect UnSub to taunt his victims or send veiled threats to potential witnesses against him?

Just kind of thinking out loud here, you understand. Purely a matter of abstract speculation, perhaps of interest to the BSU analysts at Quantico only as an exercise in psychological theory.

Maybe the BSU analysts could factor in some other variables. Say, for instance, if UnSub liked to brag about his connection to law enforcement officials, or exhibited the kind of sadistic personality that would brag about using martial arts to inflict pain on a woman.

Do you think FBI criminal profiling specialists would be interested to learn that UnSub had previously engaged in behavior “disturbing enough to result in a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation“?

The web is starting to close, to those associated I say again: States evidence NOW!

Friar Tuck: I’m sorry my Lord, the maid has sought sanctuary in a consecrated place.

Lord Germaine: Nonsense…

Friar Tuck: Violation of sanctuary is punishable by Excommunication!

Sir William: Excommunication!

Lord Germaine: How dare you threaten me! Once again Friar, stand aside.

Sir William: Wait Germaine, our very souls may be at state.

The Adventures of Robin Hood 1955 Episode 4 Friar Tuck

It is has been a truism that stories, poems and histories have a big effect on culture and actions. When the age of movies and television came those same effects came through. My own favorite show of the era was the Adventures of Robin Hood starring Richard Greene. I always try to encourage modern lefties to watch the show. It’s usually not hard since once they find out Ring Lardner one of the blacklisted communist writers was involved it becomes almost a duty for them. Of course while Lardner tries to give his anti-capitalist message he finds himself over and over instead giving the message against modern relativism, as the church (specifically the Catholic Church) becomes the classic protector of the downtrodden against an increasingly immoral state.

When watching most TV series from the 60’s you can’t help but notice that the moral norms of traditional Americanism. Hard work, church and earning your own way are emphasized, as is the idea of personal honor.

With the advent of the counter-culture all of these were questioned in TV and movies with unsurprising results culturally.

I thought of this when I saw Ladd Ehlinger Jr.’s piece today on the subject of the movies.

Unfortunately, most people who read conservative blogs are people whose minds are already made up. Collectivists know this, which is why they rule the world of entertainment. They are also extraordinarily good at giving their own “kind” a shot. Take a look at most indie films out there (the world where all filmmakers start) and most suffer from severe economic restraints: no name actors, simple stories with one or two locations. “Art” films. But they get reviewed, they get distributed, they get “out there” because collectivist media knows how to fight through fiction.

Which leaves conservative filmmakers at a severe disadvantage. How do you get the word out about your micro-budget indie conservative film (because no one in H’wood will invest studio bucks into your stuff, when there’s all those anti-war movies to make), when you don’t have name actors, and the only media philosophically inclined to notice you has – for lack of a more delicate term – its head up its own ass reading and writing intricate articles on the latest conservative concept on income tax restructuring (which changes few minds, if any), or the latest liberal outrage of the day?

Just a thought: if you really want liberty to win, you need to beat the creators of today’s “Murphy Browns” and “Bourne Identities.” Not the obscure bloggers of Media Matters or the morons at MSNBC. You do this by giving more air to conservative “fictioneers” than to their opponents (like Michael Moore’s jockstrap), even if reporting on the latest jockstrap’s stupidity gets you more hits or ratings.

It will take time, but it can happen.

It can not be overestimated how important this kind of thing is, consider this speech from Lord of the Rings, Return of the King.

the Lord of the Rings series is the classic tale of Western Civilization and values, I think it is no coincidence that the movies came out before the start of the war on terror. Think of how many people were inspired by these pictures at a time when it was needed most.

The problem is that we can’t count on movie makers to be finding more classic conservative stories to adapt. We are better off supporting our own writers and movie makers as Ladd suggests.

If we want to win the culture wars, we have to fight on the field where the war takes place.

And in that same spirit, I bring you this video from the band Madison Rising:

…but life might be easier when his crystal ball isn’t working well.

WCRN (Da TechGuy on Da Radio) listeners may remember that Ladd opined that Occupy Wall Street is all about preparing for 2012: thug tactics, subtle threats to reelect Obama “or else” our cities will be destroyed, etc.

Now, Van Jones, Truther and Green Jobs Czar, has said this about OWS:

“You’re going to see an evolution now as you go from protests, keep the protests, but now expand into politics,” Jones said. “And if you thought there was an earthquake in 2010 when the Tea Party moved into politics, wait until this 99 percent movement moves over into politics. You haven’t seen anything yet.”

“[K]eep the protests, but now expand into politics.”  Sounds a lot like something that an independent film maker once said.

Lest anyone think, “Oh, that’s Roxeanne being a crazy pessimistic conspiracy theorist again,” let me remind all of you that OWS, as it presents itself, has no logical end game. There are no demands that the protestors are making, such when those demands are met they will pack up their tents and go back to their rich daddy’s houses.  Unlike the Tax Day protests, there is no time limit on this protest (especially not one outlined in a permit): ergo, there is no end time at which the protestors will pack up and go home, whether or not their demands are met.  The way that OWS presents itself, the third-world tent cities will be permanent downtown fixtures, unless the police come in and dismantle them by force.

Either OWS was the most poorly thought-out protest in decades, being particularly stupid even by liberal standards, or there is something else planned.  Now, if that “something else” were not deeply sinister, one would think that OWS would have announced that plan already, given that the cries to “pack up and go home” are getting louder by the day.   Lacking such a plan, I’m guessing that the best we can expect from this group is well-trained, planned, European-style riots that burn whole sections of cities in 2012.

These people don’t have a policy agenda, aren’t advocating for or against any specific legislation, and don’t have an end game.  Stock up on fire extinguishers and shotguns, peeps.

Update: Via Twitter, Ladd sent his article from 06 October 2011: Ignore Occupy Wall Street at Your Peril. Ladd writes,

All one has to do is connect the dots on the #OccupyWallStreet organizers to see who’s really behind it. All roads lead to the White House. Obama’s friends and supporters are organizing the #OccupyWallStreet protests, and now trying to bring them out to other cities like Washington D.C. and even New Orleans (oh yeah – a great financial powerhouse of a city. What are they going to do, #OccupyTipitinas?). As Stephen Lerner himself states, he wants the SEIU to help create a “crisis.”

Six weeks later, Van Jones says that this is about influencing the 2012 elections.  Ladd, what are next week’s Powerball numbers?

Seriously, though, your choices here are between incredible stupidity or a very sinister plan that probably involves (at the very least) rioting, election fraud, harassment at the polls, and scare tactics.  It will be Chicago-style thuggery and European-like rioting in one hundred different cities.

…but are significant.

Item: Herman Cain not only still leads in the polls but Newt Gingrich has tied Romney

Cain is still on top, and more than sixty percent of primary voters are saying the sexual harassment stories aren’t impacting their decision.

It looks like the accusations are not having an effect on the polls, but are they having an effect elsewhere? That’s our next item:

Item: Stacy McCain interviews Mark Block and gives an interesting piece of information concerning fundraising.

RSM: Yeah. Well, now, $9.4 million [fundraising since Oct. 1] is the number I just heard?
BLOCK: It was over $9 million.

RSM: In 40 days?

BLOCK: Yep.

RSM: Which is $225,000 a day.

BLOCK: It doesn’t take a simple regression analysis to figure that one out, does it?

With a lean staff and a cash campaign this is an equation for staying till the end.

Stacy also has the line of the day for those who don’t like Block:

Malkin’s complaint, basically, is that Mark Block is a lying scumbag. Having spent a good deal of time covering Republican campaigns, however, I’m willing to attest that “lying scumbag” and “GOP political operative” are pretty much synonymous

Item: You always infect the ones you love…

Ladd Ehlinger reports that the occupy moment is now officially hazardous to your health:

Now an unlikely enemy has arrived to lay waste to these plans, the super-tuberculosis bug. Lie down with dogs, get fleas; lie down with Occupiers, and get both fleas and a disease that can’t be cured and may well kill you.

The decision to treat the occupy movement like illegal aliens and choose not to enforce laws is now going to have serious public health consequences for our liberal cities and the liberal mayors etc who allowed it.

Item: Virginia is for conservatives

Apparently reports of the Democratic surge in 2011 is vastly overestimated:

Reeves’s victory over the 28-year Senate veteran delivers the last bastion of Democratic power in Richmond into the hands of the GOP, which already controlled the House, the governor’s mansion and the attorney general’s office.

But…but the OCCUPY movement! I thought it was popular, and I thought Obama changed the game, well as a matter of fact he did.

The Obama campaign has held some 1,600 events in the state in the last half-year alone. Only last month Mr. Obama hopped a three-day bus trip through Virginia and North Carolina. Obama officials keep flocking to the state, and Tuesday’s election was to offer the first indication of how these efforts are succeeding.

There is a reason the Unions kept Obama out of Ohio during the Question 2 business.

So while we enjoy each others company don’t forget to keep up with this stuff.

As the hit count of Ladd Ehlinger’s viral video on CA-36 manages to rise (on twitter @Webszachandrews tells me it has doubled since my post this morning) without my embedding of it; we see that Talking Points Memo DC apparently has a different definition of “thoroughly debunked” than CBS News:

A man who said he left a ruthless street gang in Central America and later won praise for his anti-gang work in Los Angeles was arrested Wednesday by authorities who allege he conspired to kill a rival even as he spoke out against gang life.

Alex Sanchez, 37, who heads the local office of the nonprofit Homies Unidos anti-gang group, was taken into custody at his Bellflower home on federal racketeering charges

I may be what some call a “wanna be” but I think this would be what people might consider a “legitimate story” as opposed to what Sam Stein calls: “fairly uncontroversial” at Huffpo. At least Talking Points Memo implies by its very name that it is spinning.

Normally one would not consider the video in question an example of “raising the level of debate” but it’s hard not to raise the level when it started at zero. But in the interest of raising the level of debate lets instead embed this video by Kerry Pickett on a protest in the NY 9th District to ask Anthony Weiner to resign:

Talk about a classic Brooklyn accent. I’ll bet his parents or grandparents were Dodger fans.

Amazingly this is actually raising the level of debate. I suspect if the DCCC’s call for Weiner to resign has not been effective I can’t imagine their shouts on this video will be.

I was really taken aback by the speed that the Democrats reacted to Ladd Ehlinger’s latest little video.

Sign our petition calling on Republican candidate Craig Huey to condemn this offensive and sexist ad, and demand that the ad makers immediately take it down immediately.

I’m not sure how effective petition campaigns run by democrats are going to be in persuading republicans but as for the DCCC’s demand that the video be removed Ladd being Ladd has reacted as anyone who knows him would expect:

My answer: No! I didn’t kill anyone. I didn’t even enable anyone to kill anyone. And… oh yeah: s*** **! The ad’s funny. It makes me laugh. So if, for some reason, it’s pulled by youTube, a thousand will be launched in its place all over Algorez’ Internetz.

Sam Stein has an interesting description of the program Ehlinger is objecting to:

The spot, targeting Janice Hahn — the Democratic candidate in a special election to take over Rep. Jane Harman’s L.A.-based House seat — spun a fairly uncontroversial attempt to have reformed gang-members draw current ones away from that lifestyle into tales of demonic violence, taxpayer subsidized rape and drug abuse.

Apparently it was so uncontroversial that it was discontinued by the democratic mayor. Ladd again:

Because you’re only drawing more attention to your past of supporting criminals, Janice, and forcing policemen out of their jobs for doing their duty. So there you go. Claim victimhood all you like, but how many people were killed by your coddling? There’s a reason Mayor Villaraigosa took the program away from you. He’s a Democrat. So are you. Think about it.

On youtube as of 7:34 a.m. the dislikes on this video outnumber the likes by a factor of 5 and the “YouTube” community seeing the content of this video has decided to take decisive action:

I've blocked out the actual image of the video here

When I checked the video’s hits yesterday it was at about 302. That was about 100 hits less than the number of hits on my interview with Ron Paul Supporters at the St. Anselm debate. Thanks to the diligence of YouTube and the efforts of the DCCC, youtube the viewership of this video has been restrained,,,

only 30k+ views in 17 hours, That'll show him!

…or not

Now I think the issue is a valid one but I didn’t thing the video was appropriate for this blog so although I linked it I have not embedded it, meanwhile the people making the loudest objections have embedded the video (bypassing the Youtube blocks btw) driving the views by a factor of more than 100? Stacy McCain puts it in context:

Questions: Is Janice Hahn’s record as a city council member a legitimate issue in her congressional campaign? And shouldn’t she have to face tough questions about her record of support for this very bad policy? Are journalists in California just underpaid P.R. shills for the Democratic Party, or are they just too lazy to be bothered doing any actual reporting?

I suspect that if these questions were being asked by news organizations, we would not be arguing about a viral video this morning.