Sakozy to French workers: "Surrender to productivity"

The new president of France is seeking to reform the economy of Gaul.

Apparently it is a French tradition to take long lunches, kiss your co-workers good morning, and stand around on breaks smoking a cigarette while wearing a beret and striped shirt. Ok I made that last one up.

Sarkozy wants French workers to be paid for their overtime. Currently all they receive are extra days off.

Recent studies have also confirmed that French workers are the biggest whiners in the world. I always thought that title should go to Congressional Dims.

Of course, there could not be a story on CNN that does not take a swipe at the US.

Some dumbass American babe that works in France said "I did think I would have had a more humane life than if I was working in New York."

Yeah because France is just a great place to live once you get past the race riots, high taxes, and car burnings.

Listen I am sure that France has the potential to reform. I hope that Sarkozy has the power to get things done because Europe needs to regain its economic vitality. Still I fear that an entrenched socialistic mindset will prevent the French from reviving their once flourishing economy.

Miss USA jeered by Mexican audience...

...for not speaking Spanish in Mexico.

Sorry can not comment, my Irony Meter just exploded and I need to put it out.

Isn't God the Alpha?

Well, for the perhaps one hundredth time since the "Sensitive Male" craze of the 1970's, the media is declaring the Alpha male dead.

According to Jennie Yabroff at Newsweek, what women really want is an unambitious man who spends all his time on the couch playing video games and not worried about competing in the real world. Of course this is news to all the ladies I know. That sort of behavior is cute when the guy is 24, but when he turns 30 without a meaningful direction, they tend to leave. It promotes the irresponsible man as the answer to a ladies dreams. So what women now want is a man to sit around, spend her money, and use her for sex. Great, we sure have reached an enlightened age haven't we folks.

Yabroff blames this "new" attraction to the beta male (she never accounts for the long term popularity of Woody Allen) on the fact that we are losing in Iraq. Hey Jennie, maybe we are losing in Iraq because Feminists have so emasculated the American man that we can no longer fight and win. We are fighting the ultimate Alpha males in Iraq. They have their ideology and are not afraid to spread it with fire and sword.

I can not see why anyone would idolize a vacillating, weak, follower. Are we so far from John Wayne, Leonidas, and William T. Sherman that we can not see the virtue of the man who takes charge, defeats enemies, and does what needs to be done?

Let me tell you where this article really gets it wrong: It equates the Alpha Male with with what everyone would define as the "asshole." It describes Alpha males as "abrasive" and not "amenable to consensus." Of course we all know that consensus is the total absence of leadership.

The point I wish to make is that this article sets up a straw man. It paints the Alpha male as an ego-centric, aggressive, pompous, self-righteous know it all. This misconstrues reality. The stereotypical alpha male of yesteryear was a quiet self-assured man who others instinctively followed. He got things done because he was a leader and everyone could sense his inner strength. Being an alpha male is like being a lady, if you are one no one needs to tell you so. A man can be sensitive and still be a leader.

The examples she gives as successful Beta males are noted adulterer Bill Clinton and Al Gore, noted liar and loser. Are these the men women really want? A cheater and a Chicken Little?

This article is just another attempt to promote the morally relativist agenda. It attacks the idea that men should be masculine, which is not synonymous with being jerk, and promotes the notion that men should be weak and petty.

The article is right: we are in the twilight of our nation, but it is not because of the failure of the alpha male, it is because the modern age has killed him.

Long live the Dyspublic

A Kansas City bookstore owner is burning the books he can not give away.

I have to admit, I sympathise with the guy. The written word is pretty much dead these days. Most adults and children do not care for books, and the ones they do enjoy are a far cry from what anyone would call "literature."

I blame teachers and modern society as a whole. It just is not fashionable to read anymore. When I was in school they had idiotic programs that were intended to trick kids in to wanting to read. These programs were stupid and the prizes were lame.

I believe Neil Postman best described the state we are in when he contrasted the novels 1984 and A Brave New World:

"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us. "

Kids do not feel that the written word can have any relevance to them. A teacher friend of mine put it quite succinctly: "The kids are bored with the books." The answer to this seems to be: "Give them trivial non-sense to read that in no way helps them realize the truth about their souls."

I know the kids are bored with the books. That is no reason to write off their value.

We are slouching toward a dystopia full of brain dead children who can sing every word of the latest pop princess's ode to rebellious-conformist onanism, but who can not read a single line of Plato without falling into fits of apathy.

The Republic is dead. Long live the Dyspublic.

Article Roundup

After my long absence, your humble WordBearer has returned to the shores of blogdom to minister to the sick and faint of heart.

Couple of tidbits:

1. See Spiderman 3. It is really good despite all the complaints. As a true blue Spiderman fan, I got what I expected from the movie. All the complaints are coming from Comic Book Guy "Worst Movie Ever" types who basically want a complete retelling of the comic book frame by frame. While I am sympathetic with that point of view, I understand that you must make changes to make the story accessible to the general public.

2. Law school is damn hard.


Now to some of my patented opinions.

-----------------------------------------

Afghans might be starting to get it.

It seems that many Afghans are starting to place the blame for civilian deaths from NATO strikes on the fact that the Taliban are using civilians are shields. All I can say is: About Damn Time.

Of course there still is a disconnect between what the Afghans want and what NATO is willing to do. Local Afghans are attacking Taliban positions in their area and are not afraid to ask them not to lay mines near their villages. Meanwhile NATO forces are engaging in "public relations."

NATO hopes to win over the local farmers that support the Taliban by contrasting the life lived under the Taliban with that lived under the new Afghan government. This will fail.

This strategy will fail because it misses the mark on what the Afghans want. NATO promises these second tier Taliban development. What they should promise them is security. If they were interested in development they would have turned to the West long ago. The Taliban can provided them with what they want: security. NATO can militarily offer them security, but we are not able to because of politics. In the West we must agonize over every civilian casualty and we constantly ask "Is the price too high?" Our enemies never ask this question. We need to show them that lawlessness will be punished.

NATO seems to think that people will forget the roving death squads in their village if they have a flush toilet and running water. That thinking is absurd. Development must follow peace...not the other way around.

The simple fact is this: The Islamofacists love killing infidels and waging jihad more than we love our civilization and heritage. The West must either renew itself spiritually or be prepared for ossification and Islamization.

Here in the West we think that flashy commercials and promises of Coke and smiles will win over the world's poor and downtrodden. This is untrue. We need to offer them them security, ordered liberty, and reject our own "do as you please/get rich get high get off" mentality. Our enemies are the opposite side of the same coin.

We can win this war, but it will not be done with words. The sword must accompany the word.

The return of the WordBearer

Howdy friends, well wishers, and not so well wishers. Your friendly neighborhood WordBearer is back on the block.

I know I have not posted since March, but I have been busy. I had a big appellate brief due and then hurled headlong into finals. Well finals are over this week.

Additionally, I have a new girlfriend. She is really special and perfect for me.

I promise I will get back to some of my usual color commentary after my Property Law final of Saturday.

- WordBearer: Back in Black