The Curse of “Diversity”

So good to hear someone tell the truth:

Diversity, the idea, is good. Diversity, the social engineering project, in which each colored, each religionist, each sexual preference, is praised for the simple fact that he or she exists, is a load of crap. When everyone is all into fully embracing their “identity,” they give up what Jean Baudrillard calls the will for sovereignty. In other words, who gives an eff what you call yourself if you’re not free? Yet that’s exactly what the diversity discourse does. It tells you, here is a nice corner for you , look we even put cushions there of the kind your mother stitches, now just stay there OK? Everyone ends up in ghettoes. The best place in the US to see it are top tier universities like the kind where I went, or, you can go to Canada, apparently the entire country is suffering from this problem.

Moments In Desperation, Vol XXVII

"Look, the bill in the Senate is not [the president’s]. The White House was called in after the negotiations already began on the bill. In the House, they’re going to start from scratch, it’s not his bill. And the president, I just think, needs to drop out of this debate. He’s unpopular, the opponents of immigration reform are going to call whatever the bill is, a Bush bill, because they think that’ll make it more unpopular than it might otherwise have been." – Fred Barnes, still spinning, Fox News.

The Netroots and Obama

Have you noticed how Obama’s healthcare plan is the more centrist of those on offer from the Democrats? And have you checked out Obama’s latest foreign policy article? Money quote:

To renew American leadership in the world, we must immediately begin working to revitalize our military. A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace…

We must use this moment both to rebuild our military and to prepare it for the missions of the future. We must retain the capacity to swiftly defeat any conventional threat to our country and our vital interests…

We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines…

I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened…

I will work with other nations to secure, destroy, and stop the spread of these [nuclear] weapons …

Iran and North Korea could trigger regional arms races, creating dangerous nuclear flashpoints in the Middle East and East Asia. In confronting these threats, I will not take the military option off the table…

We should pursue an integrated strategy that reinforces our troops in Afghanistan and works to remove the limitations placed by some NATO allies on their forces….

To defeat al Qaeda, I will build a twenty-first-century military…

The anti-war left is worried. Money quote:

Again, I’m sorry to say this, as I know it will bring me grief from many of you, but Obama sounds just like a hawk – maybe a more competent version of Bush.

Er, no. Obama has pledged to get out of the Jihadist trap in Iraq. He’s a path beyond Bush-Cheney. But he doesn’t appear to be in denial about the threat itself. I don’t have a problem with that. In fact, isn’t it precisely the strategy we need? Call it: chastened interventionism.

Good Advice

Mark Kleiman calls it like it is:

Democrats should stop getting the vapors every time a Republican accuses them of being "soft on terror," and stop whining about how mean and divisive the Republicans are being (though indeed Bush’s preference for political point-scoring over national unity is indeed one example of his unseriousness about fighting the GWOT). Instead, they should point out in detail how the total fecklessness of the Bush Administration has made the country less safe.