Amid the Schwartz/Soros furor, a major Jewish group defends Beck

The wacky hedge fund, god-fantasizing, ethically two-faced Hungarian rambler George Soros doesn't have every Jewish group, and human rights group, adoringly -- half-blind, politically correct and sheepishly, in my view -- at his side.

I did not see Glenn Beck's series about Soros, and I am sure something he said has been taken out of context by knee-jerk liberal groups, Jewish groups and missing-the-point apologists for Soros. I am also sure that Beck probably upset some people for being blunt in his characterization of Soros' actions during the Nazi regime's control of his homeland, and his activity today. Well, suck it up, people. Soros is not your local charity group. He's a bit melted in the head, loaded with cash and awfully eager to shut up his opponents through his funded groups -- like any good god-fantasizing autocrat would be.

Beck may be some things, but in pursuit of world power he is not. That's the other guy, Soros. So, right there, Soros must prove that concern wrong. And I don't think he will. So, Beck has the handicap in this battle of public personalities. People seem to spend a lot of time shooting down Beck, while getting many facts wrong. Is he ever incorrect? Duh, yeah. Not so often as those who attack him by habit wish he were. And he's hardly dangerous. Also, take whatever you want away from him, but at least Beck's books are coherent, unlike the Soros drivel I have tried to read.

I have educated myself and seen enough, often through personal experience, half-twisted people with some good intentions but very bad traits (Soros, I mean, not Beck, dammit), the Holocaust, Nazi Germany, Hitler, anti-Semitism, world parity groups, utopian fantasies, and other stuff. That Soros does not regret doing what he did to his fellow citizens -- helping to turn Jews over to the Nazis -- is a step too far in the direction of amoral to meet acceptable criteria in the survival game. Survival is a solid instinct. To not regret what was done is akin to the rest of the placation and apathy that allowed the Nazis to flourish for a while.

Major Jewish Group Defends Beck Amid Soros Furor | The Blaze :
In a three-part series on Beck's Fox program last week, Beck portrayed Soros as the "puppet master" behind, among other things, world financial collapses. While describing Soros, Beck told how, during the Holocaust, the 14-year-old Hungarian Jew "used to go around with this anti-Semite and deliver papers to the Jews and confiscate their property and then ship them off."

The "anti-Semite" was Soros's fake grandfather, who was paid off by his real father in an effort to conceal the young Soros's Jewish identity. He has not shown remorse or regret for those actions.

"A number of American Jewish leaders condemned Mr. Beck for these remarks," ZOA's statement says, "yet a 1998 interview with Soros conducted by Steve Kroft on '60 Minutes' shows that Beck did not misstate the facts."

The group goes on to detail a litany of "anti-Israel, anti-American" remarks made by Soros over the years....
George Soros is what is wrong with making money off of other people making products and services while we bet against them. He creates influence with his cash the way some James Bond antagonist holds the world hostage with satellite-born death lasers.

Investment success is not wrong -- I am not against informed investing, just the opposite -- but an apparent underlying kookiness, which Soros seems to have (ever tried to read one of his rambling, poorly edited books?), no matter the person's success, or half of his stated goals, is not to be lauded. How anyone could have faked their way through the Holocaust in the manner that Soros -- originally Schwartz -- did and not feel remorse is a sign of very distorted emotional/ethical wiring. It does not deserve reward, as some Canadian group (Canadian International Council) bestowed upon Soros (see this link) nor some absolutist appreciation. It needs to be looked at carefully, not set aside. I am glad Beck and ZOA, among others, can see that.

It is shameful that some Canadian blind mice chose to reward Soros for one thing while overlooking a glaring problem: he has an obviously autocratic, anti-liberty intent in his approach to economics, politics and media. He wants to control the money and the message. Seems like a kind of thinking ripe for regret down the line. Not the regret of Soros, but of the Canadians.

I can only imagine -- for lack of understanding it -- that the Canadian group and the many others who adore Soros on the one hand care nothing of -- excuse or don't even understand -- his other hand. Hopefully the other hand will slap them in the face some day. In the process, I hope some complete sense of his grand scheme will sink in. (Not only the money-making, anti-Communist influence-peddling part, but the part that madly craves what I suspect as a benevolent autocracy of his doing, a worldview of his making.) Fortunately, mad geniuses don't tend to hang onto real power for long. Not against truly free societies, at least. Let's hope Soros run out of time before anyone, in economic desperation, appoints him the chancellor, or god, of anything.

- jR
Enhanced by Zemanta

A reason to be afraid of most Democrats in the House

Heath ShulerHeath Shuler. Image via Wikipedia
If you needed a reason to be concered about the mindset of elected Democrats, you only need to look so far. The following suggests, perhaps, that the only way to snap the House Democrats -- the most so-called "liberal" among them, certainly -- out of their view that things are running just fine, thanks to them, is to replace them. At least, to bump out about 3/4 of them in 2012 (or 150 of them).
House Democrats Re-Elect Pelosi as Their Leader (via The Caucus, a NY Times blog)
Officials said that [Nancy] Pelosi defeated Representative Heath Shuler of North Carolina in an internal party vote, 150 to 43. Mr. Shuler acknowledged before the vote that he had no chance to win, but he wanted to give disgruntled Democrats a chance to register their opposition to Ms. Pelosi's leadership anyway.
Mr. Shuler, the former college quarterback who won his third term representing North Carolina's 11th District, publicly called on her not to run. After the vote, Mr. Shuler said the vote showed that concerns about Ms. Pelosi's leadership went beyond a few conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats.
"It came out pretty much as we expected," he told reporters, adding that "it wasn't about winning the race, but it was about having a voice within our caucus."
Ms. Pelosi became the first female Speaker after Democrats gained a majority in the House in 2006. She has been a prolific fundraiser, collecting more than $200 million for the party since joining the leadership in the House in 2002.
I guess we'll see by this time next year whether or not it will be as regrettable to have John Boerner as Speaker as it has been a dippy rich chick from the ether of the snobby side of San Francisco.
- jR
Enhanced by Zemanta

On Being God, from the Mouth of George (Schwartz) Soros

George Soros is the primary funder of the crass, childish activism-peddling group,, and other extremely liberal org.'s, and is considered a man who funds anti-communist efforts worldwide (against ideals any farther left than those steeply liberal groups he funds, it seems). The right doesn't like him, while the left is at times seemingly financially dependent on him. He is not just a man with lots of money earned mostly from betting against the success of companies (hedge funds), and even his several unreadable books are not the most notable thing beyond his cash activism. This, to me, is more notable: 

It seems that Soros believes he was anointed by God. "I fancied myself as some kind of god …" he once wrote. "If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble."

When asked by Britain's Independent newspaper to elaborate on that passage, Soros said, "It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out."

Since I began to live it out. Those unfamiliar with Soros would probably dismiss the statement out of hand. But for those who have followed his career and sociopolitical endeavors, it cannot be taken quite so lightly.

He's creepy. Juuuust creepy. At least he's only intent on destroying free society as we know it, and not the planet. Something to be grateful for. When did we start liking people with god complexes? I didn't get that memo. Oh! It's a leftist thing! That explains it! 

- jR

From a site that is no fan of bad advertising, or foul political attitudes

This is just snide. Sad. Repugnant in its sheer bully, childish meanness.

Congratulations, Democrats. Now that we've seen this ad, nominations for Most Offensive Ad of the Year are closed and you have officially been declared the winners.

The Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (that's what the Democrat Party calls itself in Minnesota) sent out this remarkably offensive "Ignore the Poor" anti-Catholic mailer.

How loud would they squeal if someone – anyone – would have run an ad this offensive about Muslims?

- jR

Enhanced by Zemanta

Guy hassled over refusing pat-down at San Diego airport - Drudge Report

TSA security measures hit home for one traveller who didn't want to be body scanned or groped (via Drudge Report)....

He refused the full body scan, the pat down was explained and he refused, he then dealt with TSA supervisor's supervisor, and that led him to seeking his ticket refund. But leaving the airport? Not yet:

... At this point, I thought it was all over. I began to make my way to the stairs to exit the airport, when I was approached by another man in slacks and a sport coat. He was accompanied by the officer that had escorted me to the ticketing area and Mr. Silva. He informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine. I asked him if he was also going to fine the 6 TSA agents and the local police officer who escorted me from the secure area. After all, I did exactly what I was told. He said that they didn't know the rules, and that he would deal with them later. They would not be subject to civil penalties. I then pointed to Mr. Silva and asked if he would be subject to any penalties. He is the agents' supervisor, and he directed them to escort me out. The man informed me that Mr. Silva was new and he would not be subject to penalties, either. He again asserted the necessity that I return to the screening area. When I asked why, he explained that I may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined. I told him that I would submit to a walk through the metal detector, but that was it; I would not be groped. He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate. I told him that San Diego was not listed on the TSA's website as an airport using Advanced Imaging Technology, and I believed that I would only be subject to the metal detector. He replied that he was not a webmaster, and I asked then why he was referring me to the TSA's website if he didn't know anything about it.

HIT THE LINK to read more of this amazing mess that is the TSA. 

(Sent using mobile app by

- jR (aka AirFarceOne in Twitter)