Wednesday, November 4, 2009

10 things to celebrate 十个原因使我热爱美国--为什么我讨厌反美的人

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

美国是人类自由与希望的最后堡垒。 由美国“独立宣言”与美国宪法所代表的美国精神是我选择作为一个美国公民的原因。 我希望每一个美国公民与新移民都扪心自问:美国代表什么? 我为什么来到美国? --- 陈凯

America is the last bastion for human freedom and hope in the world. American spirit enunciated by the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution is what attracts me to have chosen to become an American citizen. I hope every American citizen, native born or foreign born, ask himself/herself: What is America? Why do I come to America?! --- Kai Chen


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

10 things to celebrate 十个原因使我热爱美国

Why I'm an anti-anti-American 为什么我讨厌反美的人


Dinesh D'Souza

Sunday, June 29, 2003

America is under attack as never before -- not only from terrorists but also from people who provide a justification for terrorism. Islamic fundamentalists declare America the Great Satan. Europeans rail against American capitalism and American culture. South American activists denounce the United States for "neocolonialism" and oppression.

Anti-Americanism from abroad would not be such a problem if Americans were united in standing up for their own country. But in this country itself, there are those who blame America for most of the evils in the world. On the political left, many fault the United States for a history of slavery, and for continuing inequality and racism. Even on the right, traditionally the home of patriotism, we hear influential figures say that America has become so decadent that we are "slouching towards Gomorrah."

If these critics are right, then America should be destroyed. And who can dispute some of their particulars? This country did have a history of slavery and racism continues to exist. There is much in our culture that is vulgar and decadent. But the critics are wrong about America, because they are missing the big picture. In their indignation over the sins of America, they ignore what is unique and good about American civilization.

As an immigrant who has chosen to become an American citizen, I feel especially qualified to say what is special about America. Having grown up in a different society -- in my case, Bombay, India -- I am not only able to identify aspects of America that are invisible to the natives, but I am acutely conscious of the daily blessings that I enjoy in America. Here, then, is my list of the 10 great things about America.

-- America provides an amazingly good life for the ordinary guy. Rich people live well everywhere. But what distinguishes America is that it provides an impressively high standard of living for the "common man." We now live in a country where construction workers regularly pay $4 for a nonfat latte, where maids drive nice cars and where plumbers take their families on vacation to Europe.

Indeed, newcomers to the United States are struck by the amenities enjoyed by "poor" people. This fact was dramatized in the 1980s when CBS television broadcast a documentary, "People Like Us," intended to show the miseries of the poor during an ongoing recession. The Soviet Union also broadcast the documentary, with a view to embarrassing the Reagan administration. But by the testimony of former Soviet leaders, it had the opposite effect. Ordinary people across the Soviet Union saw that the poorest Americans have TV sets, microwave ovens and cars. They arrived at the same perception that I witnessed in an acquaintance of mine from Bombay who has been unsuccessfully trying to move to the United States. I asked him, "Why are you so eager to come to America?" He replied, "I really want to live in a country where the poor people are fat."

-- America offers more opportunity and social mobility than any other country, including the countries of Europe. America is the only country that has created a population of "self-made tycoons." Only in America could Pierre Omidyar, whose parents are Iranian and who grew up in Paris, have started a company like eBay. Only in America could Vinod Khosla, the son of an Indian army officer, become a leading venture capitalist, the shaper of the technology industry, and a billionaire to boot. Admittedly tycoons are not typical, but no country has created a better ladder than America for people to ascend from modest circumstances to success.

-- Work and trade are respectable in America. Historically most cultures have despised the merchant and the laborer, regarding the former as vile and corrupt and the latter as degraded and vulgar. Some cultures, such as that of ancient Greece and medieval Islam, even held that it is better to acquire things through plunder than through trade or contract labor. But the American founders altered this moral hierarchy. They established a society in which the life of the businessman, and of the people who worked for him, would be a noble calling. In the American view, there is nothing vile or degraded about serving your customers either as a CEO or as a waiter. The ordinary life of production and supporting a family is more highly valued in the United States than in any other country. America is the only country in the world where we call the waiter "sir," as if he were a knight.

-- America has achieved greater social equality than any other society. True, there are large inequalities of income and wealth in America. In purely economic terms, Europe is more egalitarian. But Americans are socially more equal than any other people, and this is unaffected by economic disparities. Alexis de Tocqueville noticed this egalitarianism a century and a half ago and it is, if anything, more prevalent today. For all his riches, Bill Gates could not approach the typical American and say, "Here's a $100 bill. I'll give it to you if you kiss my feet." Most likely, the person would tell Gates to go to hell! The American view is that the rich guy may have more money, but he isn't in any fundamental sense better than anyone else.

-- People live longer, fuller lives in America. Although protesters rail against the American version of technological capitalism at trade meetings around the world, in reality the American system has given citizens many more years of life, and the means to live more intensely and actively. In 1900, the life expectancy in America was around 50 years; today, it is more than 75 years. Advances in medicine and agriculture are mainly responsible for the change. This extension of the life span means more years to enjoy life, more free time to devote to a good cause, and more occasions to do things with the grandchildren. In many countries, people who are old seem to have nothing to do: they just wait to die. In America the old are incredibly vigorous, and people in their seventies pursue the pleasures of life, including remarriage and sexual gratification, with a zeal that I find unnerving.

-- In America the destiny of the young is not given to them, but created by them. Not long ago, I asked myself, "What would my life have been like if I had never come to the United States?" If I had remained in India, I would probably have lived my whole life within a five-mile radius of where I was born. I would undoubtedly have married a woman of my identical religious and socioeconomic background. I would almost certainly have become a medical doctor, or an engineer, or a computer programmer. I would have socialized entirely within my ethic community. I would have a whole set of opinions that could be predicted in advance; indeed, they would not be very different from what my father believed, or his father before him. In sum, my destiny would to a large degree have been given to me.

In America, I have seen my life take a radically different course. In college I became interested in literature and politics, and I resolved to make a career as a writer. I married a woman whose ancestry is English, French, Scotch-Irish, German and American Indian. In my twenties I found myself working as a policy analyst in the White House, even though I was not an American citizen. No other country, I am sure, would have permitted a foreigner to work in its inner citadel of government.

In most countries in the world, your fate and your identity are handed to you; in America, you determine them for yourself. America is a country where you get to write the script of your own life. Your life is like a blank sheet of paper, and you are the artist. This notion of being the architect of your own destiny is the incredibly powerful idea that is behind the worldwide appeal of America. Young people especially find irresistible the prospect of authoring the narrative of their own lives.

-- America has gone further than any other society in establishing equality of rights. There is nothing distinctively American about slavery or bigotry. Slavery has existed in virtually every culture, and xenophobia, prejudice and discrimination are worldwide phenomena. Western civilization is the only civilization to mount a principled campaign against slavery; no country expended more treasure and blood to get rid of slavery than the United States. While racism remains a problem, this country has made strenuous efforts to eradicate discrimination, even to the extent of enacting policies that give legal preference in university admissions, jobs, and government contracts to members of minority groups. Such policies remain controversial, but the point is that it is extremely unlikely that a racist society would have permitted such policies in the first place. And surely African Americans like Jesse Jackson are vastly better off living in America than they would be if they were to live in, say, Ethiopia or Somalia.

-- America has found a solution to the problem of religious and ethnic conflict that continues to divide and terrorize much of the world. Visitors to places like New York are amazed to see the way in which Serbs and Croatians, Sikhs and Hindus, Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants, Jews and Palestinians,

all seem to work and live together in harmony. How is this possible when these same groups are spearing each other and burning each other's homes in so many places in the world?

The American answer is twofold. First, separate the spheres of religion and government so that no religion is given official preference but all are free to practice their faith as they wish. Second, do not extend rights to racial or ethnic groups but only to individuals; in this way, all are equal in the eyes of the law, opportunity is open to anyone who can take advantage of it, and everybody who embraces the American way of life can "become American."

Of course there are exceptions to these core principles, even in America. Racial preferences are one such exception, which explains why they are controversial. But in general, America is the only country in the world that extends full membership to outsiders. The typical American could come to India,live for 40 years, and take Indian citizenship. But he could not "become Indian." He wouldn't see himself that way, nor would most Indians see him that way. In America, by contrast, hundreds of millions have come from far-flung shores and over time they, or at least their children, have in a profound and full sense "become American."

-- America has the kindest, gentlest foreign policy of any great power in world history. Critics of the United States are likely to react to this truth with sputtering outrage. They will point to long-standing American support for a Latin or Middle Eastern despot, or the unjust internment of the Japanese during World War II, or America's reluctance to impose sanctions on South Africa's apartheid regime. However one feels about these particular cases, let us concede to the critics the point that America is not always in the right.

What the critics leave out is the other side of the ledger. Twice in the 20th century, the United States saved the world -- first from the Nazi threat, then from Soviet totalitarianism. What would have been the world's fate if America had not existed? After destroying Germany and Japan in World War II, the United States proceeded to rebuild both countries, and today they are American allies. Now we are doing the same thing in Afghanistan and Iraq. Consider, too, how magnanimous the United States has been to the former Soviet Union after its victory in the Cold War. For the most part America is an abstaining superpower; it shows no real interest in conquering and subjugating the rest of the world. (Imagine how the Soviets would have acted if they had won the Cold War.) On occasion the United States intervenes to overthrow a tyrannical regime or to halt massive human rights abuses in another country, but it never stays to rule that country. In Grenada, Haiti and Bosnia, the United States got in and then it got out. Moreover, when America does get into a war, as in Iraq, its troops are supremely careful to avoid targeting civilians and to minimize collateral damage. Even as America bombed the Taliban infrastructure and hideouts, U.S. planes dropped food to avert hardship and starvation of Afghan civilians. What other country does these things?

-- America, the freest nation on Earth, is also the most virtuous nation on Earth. This point seems counterintuitive, given the amount of conspicuous vulgarity, vice and immorality in America. Some Islamic fundamentalists argue that their regimes are morally superior to the United States because they seek to foster virtue among the citizens. Virtue, these fundamentalists argue, is a higher principle than liberty.

Indeed it is. And let us admit that in a free society, freedom will frequently be used badly. Freedom, by definition, includes the freedom to do good or evil, to act nobly or basely. But if freedom brings out the worst in people, it also brings out the best. The millions of Americans who live decent, praiseworthy lives desire our highest admiration because they have opted for the good when the good is not the only available option. Even amid the temptations of a rich and free society, they have remained on the straight path. Their virtue has special luster because it is freely chosen.

By contrast, the societies that many Islamic fundamentalists seek would eliminate the possibility of virtue. If the supply of virtue is insufficient in a free society like America, it is almost nonexistent in an unfree society like Iran's. The reason is that coerced virtues are not virtues at all. Consider the woman who is required to wear a veil. There is no modesty in this, because she is being compelled. Compulsion cannot produce virtue, it can only produce the outward semblance of virtue. Thus a free society like America's is not merely more prosperous, more varied, more peaceful, and more tolerant -- it is also morally superior to the theocratic and authoritarian regimes that America's enemies advocate.

"To make us love our country," Edmund Burke once said, "our country ought to be lovely." Burke's point is that we should love our country not just because it is ours, but also because it is good. America is far from perfect, and there is lots of room for improvement. In spite of its flaws, however, American life as it is lived today is the best life that our world has to offer. Ultimately America is worthy of our love and sacrifice because, more than any other society, it makes possible the good life, and the life that is good.

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

Dinesh D'Souza's "What's So Great About America" has just been published in paperback by Penguin Books. He is the Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. E-mail: 1c.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/06/29/IN290713.DTL#ixzz0Vvm6XL2O

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Berlin Wall's fall will be memorialized across Wilshire 洛杉矶纪念摧垮柏林墙二十周年

Berlin Wall's fall will be memorialized across Wilshire 洛杉矶纪念摧垮柏林墙二十周年

Written by Elissa Glickman

Wednesday, 12 August 2009 00:00
- Last Updated Sunday, 04 October 2009 04:58

A wall, painted by pros and amateurs, will stand for three hours to mark the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Cold War era symbol.

WALLED OFF: An artist's rendering, left, shows what the Wall Pxrxoject may look like whe /n it is up. By Diane Haithman

August 12, 2009

In what government and arts officials are calling the most ambitious commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall outside of Germany, a symbolic re-creation of the wall that once separated East and West Berlin will be erected across Wilshire Boulevard in November. The Wall Project, painted by professional and amateur artists, will close Sunday afternoon traffic on one of the city's busiest thoroughfares for three hours on Nov. 8 beginning at 3 p.m.

The project involves the Culver City's Wende Museum and Archive of the Cold War, the city of Los Angeles, the German Consulate General in Los Angeles and other partners, and will be officially announced Thursday. In a reenactment of the actual events, invited dignitaries will break down selected portions of the Wilshire wall, which will be placed directly in front of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art.

Project leaders plan a live feed of the events between Los Angeles and Berlin, official sister cities since 1967. (Because of the time difference, it will already be Nov. 9 in Berlin, the day the wall came down in 1989).

Professional artists who will participate include "Obama Hope" muralist Shepard Fairey, L.A. muralist Kent Twitchell and Berlin-based Thierry Noir, noted for painting his brightly colored human figures on the real wall in Berlin. Twitchell said that he plans to create portraits of the two presidents who saw the beginning and the end of the Berlin Wall, John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.

The Wall Project will be made up of two parts: The "Wall Across Wilshire" will have as its adjunct the "Wall Along Wilshire -- Eastside Gallery West," which will have a somewhat longer

1 / 2

Berlin Wall's fall will be memorialized across Wilshire

Written by Elissa Glickman

Wednesday, 12 August 2009 00:00 - Last Updated Sunday, 04 October 2009 04:58

life in front of the 5900 Wilshire Blvd. building, remaining in place from Oct. 17 to Nov. 14. During its short existence, the "across" wall will bisect the "along" wall, with one end of the "across" wall ending at LACMA's outdoor installation "Urban Light."

The location is "highly symbolic," said Justinian Jampol, president and founder of the Wende Museum. "It connects downtown to the ocean, those two cultural anchors to the city. Also, going through an area where there are lots of museums and cultural institutions, it's very reflective of what occurred in Berlin, because when that line was drawn through the city, it divided up the cultural institutions." Symbolism aside, the location is not random: Wayne Ratkovich, owner of the 5900 Wilshire Blvd. building, sits on the nonprofit Wende Museum's board of directors.

From Oct. 23 to Nov. 7, 40 wall panels, all 11 feet tall and 3 feet wide, will be painted on the grounds of the Page Museum at the La Brea Tar Pits in Hancock Park, adjacent to LACMA. Thirty of those panels will be used to construct the Wall Across Wilshire, and the other 10 will form the Wall Along Wilshire.

The work of graphic designer and political illustrator Fairey will be part of the "across" wall, along with the work of graffiti artists working with ArtStorm LA and arts students at the Otis College of Art and Design, USC, CalArts and USC. Twitchell and Noir will paint an additional 10 panels for the Wall Along Wilshire, doing most of their work in front of the 5900 building. The public will have the opportunity to observe the artists at work in both locations.

Jampol said the painting done on the Berlin Wall circa 1989 "was not art, it was a political act. It was not about showing the finished artwork, it was dynamic." He said that so many artists wanted to make their mark on the Berlin Wall they often began painting over another artist's work before the paint was dry.

Los Angeles officials had to sign off on closing Wilshire. "We do this all the time," said Councilman Tom LaBonge, whose district includes the project site, mentioning a recent NASCAR-related event at the nearby Petersen Automotive Museum that also required the temporary closure of Wilshire. "Wilshire is the backbone of all the buses in the city, but . . . having had the experience of this closure near Fairfax for the Petersen, I knew it could happen."

Los Angeles German Consul General Wolfgang Drautz, who moved to Los Angeles just weeks ago, said that the Wall Project is the largest Berlin Wall anniversary commemoration that he is aware of outside of Berlin. Germany plans to donate as much as $40,000 to the effort, which Jampol estimated could cost $500,000.

"Look at the map -- that we are doing this here on the West Coast, in California, is symbolizing that it's not just a narrow, transatlantic relationship between Washington, D.C., and Berlin," Drautz said. "We are really looking forward to an event where all American cities can celebrate with us."

diane.1c
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
2 / 2

Monday, November 2, 2009

Why Obama's lieutenants love Mao 为什么奥巴马官员有崇毛症

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

奥巴马官员Anita Dunn和Ron Bloom的崇毛症不是偶然现象。 “胜王败寇”与“用目的/动机为手段辩护”是共产、纳粹与全世界左派的共同特征。 杀人、撒谎与腐败自然就成了可以被接受的行为。 --- 陈凯

Obama administration officials such as Anita Dunn and Ron Bloom with their "Mao worshipping" remarks are not some odd balls among the leftists in the world. "Winner is the king and loser is the bandit" mentality is prevalent among the despotic cultures around the world. Using lofty motives and nice-sounding ends to justify brutal/immoral means is very common among Nazis, communists/socialists, and the Western leftists. Killing/murdering, lying and corruption thus become acceptable to such people with such political cultures. --- Kai Chen

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

Why Obama's lieutenants love Mao 为什么奥巴马官员有崇毛症


Posted: October 22, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

By Jamie Glazov/Frontpage Magazine

The left's long romance with tyranny and terror is manifesting itself in the Obama administration once again. Having experienced the high of putting $900 million of American taxpayers' money into Hamas' blood-soaked hands, some Obama advisers are now getting a new fix by offering thanks and praise to the late communist mass murderer Mao Zedong.

President Obama's White House communications director, Anita Dunn, recently praised Mao Zedong in a videotaped speech to high schoolers by calling him "one of the two people that I turn to most." When confronted on it, she said she was just joking. It remains a mystery what is laughable about extolling the greatest mass murderer in human history who slaughtered 70 million of his own people. In any case, Dunn was clearly not joking, as is evident in the detailed and earnest explanation she gave the high schoolers in her references to both Mao and Mother Teresa while emphasizing the importance of perseverance and choosing one's own path.

Dunn's veneration of Mao is shared by another Obama insider, "manufacturing czar" Ron Bloom, who, it appears, has been quoting the communist mass murderer with great approval. At a 2008 Union League Club meeting in New York, for instance, Bloom explained to his audience that:

"We know that the free market is nonsense. (…) We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun."


And from the barrel of a gun Mao's political power did come indeed. Let's for a moment reflect on the crimes that Mao perpetrated:

After capturing power on Oct. 1, 1949, in the immediate post-revolutionary period alone, Mao murdered as many as 15 million Chinese citizens. In 1958, Mao launched the Great Leap Forward, an industrial and agricultural program intended to make China the world's largest steel and grain exporter. Involving demented economic schemes and brutal forced collectivization, the Great Leap was an unparalleled human disaster, exterminating approximately 38 million people through government-engineered famine.

Mao's starving victims were reduced to eating grass, dirt, leaves and tree bark in the attempt to survive. They picked through horse manure for undigested grains of wheat, or cow manure for worms. They also resorted to cannibalism, digging up freshly buried corpses. Mad from hunger, parents ate their own children – or swapped children with other parents in an attempt to ease the horror of the act. Children were also killed, boiled and used as fertilizer. Desperate villagers who abandoned their homes and traveled to other towns in search of food were mowed down by machine-gun fire.

This horrifying tragedy – the greatest famine in all human history – was created intentionally by Mao. While millions starved, plenty of food existed in state granaries. The army, however, guarded these granaries under strict order: "Absolutely no opening the granary door even if people are dying of starvation." In their biography, "Mao: The Unknown Story," authors Jung Chang and Jon Halliday conclude that if food had not been exported and instead had been distributed among the Chinese people, "very probably not a single person in China would have had to die of hunger."

In 1966, Mao launched the Cultural Revolution, designed to purge the country of all dissent and bring it completely under the dictator's vicious rule. Millions of schoolchildren became the infamous Red Guards, whose task was to destroy anything connected to traditional culture and philosophy. As Paul Johnson put it, the Cultural Revolution became "a revolution of illiterates and semi-literates against intellectuals, the 'spectacle-wearers' as they were called. ... It was the greatest witch-hunt in history, which made the Zhdanov purges in post-war Russia seem almost trivial."

In the Cultural Revolution, almost every expression of human emotion – and every cultural ritual whose purpose was to honor the sanctity of human life and relationships – became illegal, including weddings, funerals and even the simple act of holding hands. The Red Guards humiliated, beat and murdered teachers, school administrators, bureaucrats, foreign diplomats, technicians, artists, intellectuals and, eventually, anyone and everyone. "Class enemies" experienced every humiliation the Red Guards could think up; the Guards smeared their faces with ink, forced them to get down on all fours and bark like dogs, and made them eat grass. The Red Guards also literally feasted on those they had murdered. In Guangxi, where at least 137 "animals" ("class enemies"), mostly teachers and college principals, were killed, the Red Guards cooked and ate them.

An immense concentration-camp system, the laogai, spread through China like a cancerous growth. It operated under the pretense of "reform" or "re-education" through labor and self-denunciation. The horrors of the laogai almost defy description. Harry Wu, who spent 19 years in the "laogai," has given an account of its vicious dynamics in "Laogai: The Chinese Gulag." Bao Ruo-Wang has done the same regarding his seven years in the laogai in "Prisoner of Mao." Wu and Bao did for China what Armando Valladares did for Cuba in "Against All Hope," and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did for the Soviet Union in Gulag Archipelago.

Between 1949 and 1980, some 50 million Chinese people passed through this system of terror. Like Stalin's Gulag, Mao's laogai took on a life of its own, continuing its bloody work unabated until Mao's death from Parkinson's disease in 1976. In all, Chinese Communism would extinguish the lives of over 70 million people in the 20th century.


Mao biographers Jung Chang and Jon Halliday also document how this horror represented the natural order of things for Mao. Indeed, while millions of his people were starving to death, the dictator habitually informed his inner circle that it did not matter if people died and that, in fact, death was to be deemed a cause for celebration and rejoicing. This was because, naturally, destruction was necessary in order for the earthly heaven to be built. Mao wished destruction not only for his own country, but for the entire universe. As he explained: "This applies to the country, to the nation, and to mankind. ... The destruction of the universe is the same. ... People like me long for its destruction, because when the old universe is destroyed, a new universe will be formed. Isn't that better!" Mao stated that it would be ideal to sacrifice about 300 million Chinese lives for the world revolution, since "It's best if half the population is left, next best one-third. ..."

Thus, as in Castro's Cuba, mourning for the dead was forbidden. Mourning implied that there was something wrong with death – a notion that a death cult obviously couldn't allow. Moreover, grieving for a dead person singularized the individual and his private reality. Mao therefore outlawed the shedding of tears at funerals and even ordered peasants to plant crops over burial grounds – since he believed that deaths "can fertilize the ground."

With all of these barbarities in mind, it is completely no surprise that Obama insiders such as Anita Dunn and Ron Bloom would pick a genocidal dictator like Mao to be the object of their affection. These leftists are simply continuing the left's long tradition of showering adulation upon Mao – as well as other communist mass murderers.

Indeed, as I have documented in my new book, "United in Hate: The Left's Romance With Tyranny and Terror," leftists worldwide were, and have continued to be, exhilarated by Mao's horrifying reign of terror – and the philosophy it was based on. From the likes of American journalist and activist Anna Louise Strong and the French "feminist" intellectual Simone de Beauvoir, from American journalist Edgar Snow to the "Red Dean" of Canterbury Hewlett Johnson, from British filmmaker Felix Greene to Orville Schell, the dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at UC Berkeley, there was never a shortage of leftists who genuflected in the direction of Mao's killing fields.

Anita Dunn and Ron Bloom prostrating themselves before the memory of the greatest mass murderer in human history is to be totally expected. It's just another chapter of the left's long history of bowing down in front of adversary regimes and despots who devote themselves to inhumanity, oppression and death.
-------------------------------------------------------
Jamie Glazov is editor of Frontpagemag.com and author of "United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror

Saturday, October 31, 2009

China calls foul over tell-all sports memoir 袁伟民的书被贬

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

我将Wafa Sultan的演讲与新书的链锁贴在这里,望你们欣赏这个无畏的反传统专制的阿拉伯女性。 她对世界所说的关于反人性的穆斯林传统的分析与否定与我对世界所说的关于反人性的中国传统文化的分析与否定是完全一致的。 对美国自由精神的捍卫与褒扬是我们共同的结论。 我们希望世界都变得像美国,而绝非美国变得像世界其他国家。 --- 陈凯

I paste Wafa Sultan's speech and book links here for all of you to enjoy this brave thinking woman from Syria. Her opposition to her own traditional Muslim (anti-human) pseudo values is parallel to my opposition to my own Chinese traditional (anti-human) pseudo values. Our views about American values we love are also the same. We believe the world should become more like America, not the other way around. --- Kai Chen


Wafa Sultan Speech Link 演讲链锁:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up3yuQDAWKQ

Wafa Sultan's New Book: 购书链锁

A God Who Hates 仇恨之神


http://www.amazon.com/God-Who-Hates-Courageous-Inflamed/dp/0312538359/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256925679&sr=1-1

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



陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

在中国专制官方的庇护允许下发表的书籍刊物都是经过“洗脑部门”筛选过的。 作者们的话要不就是讲一半儿,要不就是有内部政治斗争的因素而“故泄机密”的。 望人们在读袁伟民的“体坛风云”的时候多问多思。 一件事可以肯定: 中共系统现在是一片混乱。 一场残酷的内部权力斗争正在展开。 --- 陈凯

Under the ubiquitous political examination, all the books and publications in China are either all fake or half fake. The authors' words should always be taken with a grain of salt. They either tell half of the story (half truth) or they only reveal certain things under the tutelage of their own party bosses for some political gain over their opponents. When you read Yuan Weimin's book, you should take the same approach. One thing is for sure: China's communist system is in total disarray. A deadly power struggle is well under way. --- Kai Chen


China calls foul over tell-all sports memoir 袁伟民的书被贬

Yuan Weimin's book includes details of secret deals to get Beijing chosen to host the 2008 Olympic Games. Some have branded him a liar and a traitor, while others applaud his candor.


By Barbara Demick/LA Times

October 31, 2009

Reporting from Beijing - Yuan Weimin was the toast of China's sporting scene from the early 1980s, when he coached the women's gold medal volleyball team, to 2001, when as head of the Chinese Olympic Committee, he helped bring home the biggest prize of all -- Beijing's selection as host city for the 2008 Summer Games. Now the 70-year-old retired cadre is being denounced by some as a liar and a traitor, accused of spilling state secrets and disrupting Chinese harmony.

The offense lies between the covers of his memoir, "Yuan Weimin: Winds and Clouds of the World of Sports," published this month in Beijing.

In the book, so far only available in Chinese, Yuan writes about a deal he says was cut during a cloak-and-dagger meeting in a Geneva hotel room eight years ago in which China promised to support the candidacy of Belgian Jacques Rogge as head of the International Olympic Committee in return for his support of Beijing's Olympic bid.

It was all kept hush-hush because Rogge, as a European representative, couldn't publicly endorse Beijing when two European cities -- Paris and Istanbul -- were also contenders, Yuan writes.

"We had a mutual understanding that we all understood clearly, even if it was not in writing," says Yuan, who credited ancient Chinese military strategies for shaping the tactics.

Yuan drops other tidbits from the backroom discussions of China's Olympics bid, including how the nation sought to deflect criticism of its human rights record. He also writes of fears during the 2000 Sydney Olympics that Chinese athletes (no names here) would be disqualified for doping, and of a women's volleyball coach arranging for the Chinese team to lose a match in the 2002 world championships to avoid facing a tougher opponent.

It is fairly mild stuff by the standards of tell-all-memoirs: no sex, no shoe boxes stuffed with cash. But it is making a splash in China just the same because it is so unusual for anybody from the inner sanctum of the Chinese sporting world to break the code of silence that usually prevails over sensitive subjects.

"I haven't seen many tell-all books come out after the Olympics, not in any country, much less in China," said David Wallechinsky, the author of several books about the Games.

Although the Chinese government has not taken action against Yuan or the publisher, a nongovernmental organization, the Chinese Assn. for the Promotion of Olympic Culture said last week it would file a civil lawsuit against Yuan's publisher, Beijing Fonghong Media Co., to prevent publication of any copies beyond the 200,000 in print in China.

"The book contains content which is far from the truth and . . . its publication can be considered as leaking of state secrets," the association said in a statement last week.

The association's head, He Zhenliang, a Chinese member of the International Olympic Committee, is accused by Yuan of having nearly scuttled Beijing's Olympic bid by supporting a South Korean candidate, Kim Un-yong, to head the IOC instead of Rogge.

The Swiss-based International Olympic Committee also rejects Yuan's allegations.

"Any insinuation that deals would have been made is absolutely false," the IOC said in a statement released last week.

The book's publication has stung many Chinese sports fans, one of whom wrote plaintively on a sports Internet bulletin board: "Even if some of the things he said were true, did he have to reveal them?"

But the influential Southern Metropolis Daily and several other major Chinese newspapers have applauded Yuan's candor.

"This is the first time that somebody in the high ranks told the inside story of the Chinese sports world," said Xu Jicheng, a prominent basketball commentator who was deputy director of media operations for Beijing Olympics organizing committee. "I think he picked the right time. Since the Olympics, Chinese people are more confident and I think we are ready to listen with an open mind."

Yuan declined an interview request, saying through his publisher that he preferred to maintain a low profile. At a news conference this month in his hometown of Nanjing, Yuan told Chinese reporters he didn't want to cause controversy.

"The purpose of this book is to tell the truth. It's just about the truth and nothing more," he said.

Yuan's revelations cover only the bidding process for the Olympics because he was not around for the Games themselves. He was sacked as sports minister at the end of 2004 in the midst of an audit into his financial dealings -- perhaps one reason for a streak of animus that runs through the book -- and replaced by a Communist Party apparatchik with no sporting experience.

In the memoir, Yuan writes that he differed with other Chinese officials about how to handle critics who said the Olympics should not be hosted by a one-party nation.

Many Chinese officials, he says, wanted to use overseas Chinese groups as proxies to counterattack, while Yuan thought the Olympic committee needed to tackle the issue directly.

"My opinion was that we should talk about human rights ourselves," he writes. "Even if only a few simple words, it would show we have the courage to talk about it and not avoid the facts."

Wallechinsky, the author, said he is disappointed that Yuan's memoir does not go farther in spilling secrets of China's winning Olympic bid.

For example, he wonders whether the officials who submitted the winning bid to host the 2008 Games had been sincere in their representations during the bidding process that China would improve its human rights situation.


"After Beijing was selected, as soon as the ink on the contract was dry, the International Olympic Committee ceded control of the Games to the Communist Party of China," said Wallechinsky.

Wallechinsky noted, however, that if Yuan divulged how that happened, "he would have to leave China immediately."


Tommy Yang and Nicole Liu of The Times' Beijing Bureau contributed to this report.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Anita Dunn, Were You Also Joking About Mother Teresa? 毛与特丽莎修女?

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

Jamie Glazov 提出不能让 Anita Dunn 崇毛事件就这样轻率了结。 我完全同意。 Anita Dunn 说她只是说着玩儿。 这让我想起尼克松基金会的人说毛塑像展出只是为了“有历史感”一样。 崇魔的借口真是无所不有。 --- 陈凯

Jamie Glazov mentions here that we should not let Anita Dunn's "worshipping Mao" incident off the hook that easily. I totally agree. Anita Dunn is now saying that she was only joking when she said "Mao is one of her favorite philosophers". That reminds me of the people from the Nixon Foundation (maybe Nixon himself) that display of Mao's statue among the world leaders such as Winston Churchill is only for "history". The excuses/pretenses for worshipping devil are indeed colorful and countless. --- Kai Chen


Mao's statue in Nixon Library with visitors from China

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

http://frontpagemag.com/2009/10/26/anita-dunn-were-you-also-joking-about-mother-theresa-by-jamie-glazov/

Anita Dunn, Were You Also Joking About Mother Teresa? 毛与特丽莎修女?

– by Jamie Glazov on Oct 26th, 2009 and filed under FrontPage.

Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine's editor. He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the author of Canadian Policy Toward Khrushchev’s Soviet Union and is the co-editor (with David Horowitz) of The Hate America Left. He edited and wrote the introduction to David Horowitz’s Left Illusions. His new book is United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror. Email him at jglazov@rogers.com.

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

So President Obama’s White House communications director, Anita Dunn, is off the hook just like that? She praises Mao Zedong, the greatest mass murderer in history, and when confronted on it says she was joking and that’s it. Why is that just it? Would it be just it if any politician or any person in a responsible position out there verbalized an admiration for Adolf Hitler?

The key issue here is that Dunn was clearly not joking. Watch her videotaped speech to high schoolers and see for yourself. With the utmost earnestness, she calls Mao “one of the two people that I turn to most” and goes into a detailed and completely serious explanation of why she holds both Mao and Mother Teresa in high regard in the context of perseverance and choosing one’s own path.

Anita Dunn should not be let off the hook so easily, let alone let off the hook at all. And here at NewReal Blog we are not going to let her off the hook. We’re not going to let an adviser to the President of the United States off the hook for articulating a veneration of a communist despot who murdered 70 million of his own people.

And so today at NewsReal we are starting a campaign. And that campaign consists of one question to Anita Dunn that we want answered: Were you also joking about Mother Theresa being “one of the two people that I turn to most”? Because you did mention Mao in combination with Mother Teresa. So if you were joking about Mao, were you also joking about Mother Teresa? We want our question answered. And we are asking for all members of the media to join us in this campaign to get an answer from Anita Dunn. Please support us and demand an answer to this question.

Editor’s note: Get the whole story on why leftists venerate communist mass murderers in Jamie Glazov’s new book, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Comments on Anita Dunn and Nixon Library 奥巴马/尼克松与崇毛症





Comments on Anita Dunn and Nixon Library 奥巴马/尼克松与崇毛症

Folks:

These comments show you the extent of communist pollution upon American political cultural landscape. Then you know why I did what I did. I think I have succeeded quite handsomely in exposing the contradictions between American principles and American behaviors.

Best. Kai Chen


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

Comments:

You might say the same of Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, George W Bush all were admirers of Mao. Nixon even personally picked out the statue of Mao that currently sits in the Nixon Presidential Library.

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

http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/3332421.aspx

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

Discuss the history...

Your accusations are boring and incorrect...but your inability to discuss the subject at hand in the thread is obvious...So...comments on Nixon's dealing with Mao and the statue that has been in the library for 20 years are welcome...

You, like Sgt Rock, seem to believe business with mass murderers is a wonderful diplomatic achievement, but quoting one is not. Be careful with this tact...as you might be surprised who has quoted Mao...

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

Feel free to discuss the shared commonality between the quotes offered in the actual comment, as opposed to the left out aspect in the article you provided.


Feel free to discuss Nixon's business with Mao...and the continued favored nation status bestowed by all US Presidents since 1980...and the current controversy surrounding the Mao statue in the Nixon Library...


Why do I have the feeling you will do none of this?

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

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/3330860.aspx

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

Nixon PRAISED Mao ..... Kissinger PRAISED Mao .... Conservative Pat Buchanan even warmed up to Mao and decided NOT to resign from Nixon's Administration. There is currently a statue of Mao at Nixon's Library. I have a hunch Beck does not know one thing about Mao & why Mao was so important - in a good way - to America & China & the world.

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

Mixed reactions to Mao

Where are the protests from Chinese-Americans? A few weeks ago, demonstrators gathered outside the Nixon Presidential Library to protest a statue of Mao.

The Orange County Register reported:

"Wearing T-shirts with the words 'Tiananmen Square' designed to look like blood dripping onto the words 'Beijing Olympics,' the protestors said having a statue of Mao in the library was like having a statue of Soviet leader Josef Stalin in the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum.

" 'Mao was crueler than Stalin, crueler than Hitler,' said Kuo Chiang Fung. 'Would you have a statue of Hitler in the museum?' "

I am mystified by the proliferation of Mao-logoed clothing. I suspect some people may just not know what they are wearing or what it symbolizes. There are some reports, however, that Mao's popularity is "surging" in China.

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

The Chicago Tribune reported on the wave of Mao nostalgia sweeping over China:

"A wave of Mao nostalgia is sweeping through China, and it crests here in his birthplace, the village of Shaoshan (pop. 1,387). The Hunan province community -- a cross between Bethlehem and Mount Vernon, Va. -- is expected to draw a record 3.5 million visitors this year, most of them Chinese pilgrims paying homage to their late leader.

"Even on a weekday, the queue to get into the mud-brick farmhouse where Mao was born in 1893 is three people wide and snakes around to the front lawn.

" 'Business is better than ever,' said Mao Juxiang, 36, a sales clerk who stands behind a glass counter stocked with bronze busts ($85), snow globes ($7) and key chains ($4.25).

"Like many of the villagers, she claims common lineage with Mao, whom she credits for China's prosperity: 'We have a brilliant life because of Chairman Mao's ideas.' "

Friday, October 23, 2009

An underground challenge to China's status quo 美媒体呼吁奥巴马关注退党潮

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

奥巴马的即将访华应是人们关注的话题: 是将中共党政放在第一位还是将自由与人的尊严放在第一位。 奥巴马的中国行会暴露他自己的本质。 --- 陈凯

The up-coming visit to China by Obama will expose what priority his administration takes -- Freedom/human rights? Or Kowtowing to the communist regime in pursuit of his domestic socialist agenda? We are all watching. --- Kai Chen


www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

Opinion

An underground challenge to China's status quo 美媒体呼吁奥巴马关注退党潮

As Obama plans his visit to China in November, he should pay attention to the Tuidang movement. It shows that the Chinese people understand human rights and civil liberties.


By Caylan Ford / Christian Science Monitor
from the October 21, 2009 edition

Washington - The lead image on the Sept. 27 edition of the Jinzhou evening newspaper was hardly unusual. In anticipation of the 60th anniversary of Communist Party rule in China, it featured a street lined with enormous red flags beating in the wind.

It would have been nearly indistinguishable from any other Chinese state-run newspaper that day but for one important detail. In the bottom left corner of the photo, scrawled on a bike rack, were eight tiny but clearly visible characters: "Heaven condemns the Communist Party; denounce it and be blessed."

Similar writings that dare to challenge the divine mandate of China's rulers appear regularly across China, hanging as banners in city parks, posted on Internet forums, or handwritten on paper bank notes. It is all evidence of a movement that has silently swept the nation. Called Tuidang, which translates simply as "withdraw from the party," the movement encourages people to publicly renounce their membership in Communist organizations. The implications are manifold. This is the first time since the 1980s that China has seen such a large, organized dissident movement – if an underground one.

The day after the image ran, the Jinzhou newspaper came under investigation by the government. Its website was shut down, and the paper taken out of circulation.

The incident represents a fitting analogy for the state of the Communist Party today. Beneath the pomp and power lie resentment, discontent, and questions. In 60 years of Communist rule, China has endured political and social upheaval that have left deep psychic wounds.

But in the country's totalitarian climate, the people have few avenues to openly discuss their country's history or to make peace with their own role in it. Since China has not had its opportunity for truth and reconciliation, its citizens are finding their own ways to do this.

Perhaps that explains the extraordinary appeal of the Tuidang movement, which organizers say has more than 60 million participants. It began in late 2004, when New York-based Chinese dissident newspaper DaJiYuan (Epoch Times, affiliated with the spiritual movement Falun Gong) ran a series of polemic editorials detailing the history of the Communist Party in China. They also proclaimed that the country would not truly be free or prosperous until it was rid of the party, which, it argued was at odds with China's cultural and spiritual values.

Millions of copies of the articles found their way into mainland China through e-mails, faxes, and underground printing houses. Some Chinese readers say the articles finally confirmed what they suspected all along – about the Great Leap Forward, the Tiananmen massacre, the Cultural Revolution. This offered recognition that their memories were real and their suffering was shared.

But despite appearances, this is not a political movement in the conventional sense. Unlike the student movement of 1989 or the more recent Charter 2008 manifesto – both of which embraced the language of Western democracy – the Tuidang movement employs distinctly Chinese language and meaning. More Confucian than humanist, it often makes its points by drawing on Buddhist and Daoist spirituality.

Denouncing the party is thus not simply political activism, but takes on spiritual meaning as a process of cleansing the conscience and reconnecting to traditional ethics and values.

In December 2004, one month after the articles were published by the dissident newspaper, its editors starting receiving statements from readers declaring their wish to disavow membership in the Communist Party, the Communist Youth League, or the Young Pioneers, sometimes after their memberships had technically expired. Today, statements representing some 60 million people have been sent to the newspaper, which posts them to an online database.

The authenticity of the declarations is impossible to independently verify. Most people sign them using aliases to protect their safety, and there are no provisions to prevent fraudulent postings.

But the numbers are really not the point. For those who do send in their statements disavowing the party, the postings offer a rare platform to vent frustrations, discuss ideas, share stories of suffering, or find forgiveness.

Many relay tales of personal victimization under the Communist Party. Take, for instance, Ding Weikun, a 74-year-old veteran party member from rural Zhejiang Province. In 2003, his town's government colluded with private developers to seize the land of local farmers. The farmers protested, Mr. Ding wrote, and armed thugs were brought in to suppress them. "I witnessed the killing and injuring of dozens of villagers, on the spot," he noted. The old man tried to pursue justice by appealing to the local government, but he was arrested and sentenced to prison by the very party that he had served for 40 years.

While some write of their personal suffering, others speak of their crimes. For them, withdrawing from the party is about seeking absolution.

"I have always thought that I was a good man, but looking back I realize that I had gradually lost myself," wrote Xiao Shanbo, a former party member from China's northeastern Liaoning Province. "My mind and heart slowly became corrupted. I declare invalid all the words and deeds I have done in the past. These were decisions that I made out of ignorance due to the lies and propaganda of the [Communist Party]."

Mr. Xiao never specifies his crimes, but closes his posting with a plea for forgiveness: "God, please give me this chance! I have gone through much arduous soul-searching, and I intend to change my ways and make up for what I have done."

The Communist Party has reacted to the phenomenon with predictable disdain. Terms related to the movement are among the most vigorously censored on the Chinese Internet, and at least 71 people have been imprisoned for possessing movement literature or propagating its spread. That means that, if found, the activist who vandalized the bike rack in Jinzhou city will be in serious trouble.

The party may have good reason to be anxious. For decades, its power has relied on an ability to censor information, control public memory, and suppress dissenting views. The statements of participants offer a rare glimpse and great insight into the sources of discontent in China.

The Tuidang movement also shows the manner in which Chinese people understand human rights, civil liberties, and democracy, and how they might reconcile these ideas with a more traditional Confucian worldview. It could perhaps even serve as a precursor for another democracy movement.

But one way or another, the movement certainly challenges the popular view that most Chinese people are satisfied with the status quo. As President Obama prepares for his November visit, it is reason to consider engaging more with the Chinese people, and not only with their government.

Today, as more and more Chinese citizens are remembering their past, they may well change China's future, too.

Caylan Ford is a master's degree candidate in international affairs at The George Washington University, where she studies Chinese politics and international security. She is currently writing a thesis on organized dissent in China. She is also a volunteer analyst at the Falun Dafa Information Center and was a staff writer for Epoch Times until 2007.

美媒体呼吁奥巴马关注退党潮

2009年10月23日 星期五

10月23日讯,在美国总统访华前夕,《基督教科学箴言报》(Christian Science Monitor) 10月21日发表名为《挑战中国现状的地下运动》(An underground challenge to China's status quo)的评论文章说:既然奥巴马计划11月访问中国,他应该关注中国的退党运动。因为这表明,中国人民完全理解人权和公民自由。

这篇文章从9月27日《锦州晚报》的头版大图片出现“天灭中共”字样的事件起笔,指出以民众精神觉醒为主要特征的退党大潮正在冲击中国社会、特别是中共独裁政权。文章表示,奥巴马总统正准备11月访华,这是一个很好的理由考虑接触更多的中国民众,而不仅仅是政府。

文章还描述道:敢于挑战中共统治的类似字样现在在中国随处可见,在城市公园悬挂的横幅上,互联网论坛的帖子上,或手写在钞票上。这完全是一个已经悄然席卷全国的迹象。这是自20世纪80年代以来第一次看到中国有这么大规模的持不同政见者的运动。

唾弃共产党因而就不仅仅是政治层面上的诉求,更重要的是在精神意义上,他是一个清洁良知、回归传统的伦理道德和价值观的过程。

共产党有充分的理由感到焦虑。几十年来,它的权力一直建立在审查信息、控制公众记忆和镇压不同意见的基础上。退党者的声明提供了一个洞见中国社会不满的难得机会。

共产党对退党现象的反应是可以预见的。所有与退党有关的词条都是中共互联网审查的最敏感词汇,至少已有71人因传播退党而遭监禁。

Thursday, October 22, 2009

AP declared Obama “Kenyan-Born” 奥巴马蒙骗自己出生地

AP declared Obama “Kenyan-Born” 奥巴马蒙骗自己出生地

http://www.infowars.com/ap-declared-obama-kenyan-born/

"This report explains the context of the oft cited debate, between Obama and Keyes in the following Fall, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, self-admitted that he was not eligible for the office."

当有人问起奥巴马是否因在肯尼亚出生而影响在美国从政时,奥巴马回答:“那又怎么样。 我只是竞选参议员,又不是竞选总统。” 自己承认他无法定资格竞选美国总统。


John Charlton

October 16, 2009

What most people know is that the Associated Press (AP) is one of the largest, internationally recognized, syndicated news services. What most people don’t know that is in 2004, the AP was a “birther” news organization.

How so? Because in a syndicated report, published Sunday, June 27, 2004, by the Kenyan Standard Times, and which was, as of this report, available at

http://web.archive.org/web/20040627142700/eastandard.net/headlines/news26060403.htm

The AP reporter stated the following:

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.

This report explains the context of the oft cited debate, between Obama and Keyes in the following Fall, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, self-admitted that he was not eligible for the office. Seeing that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004, that he was born in Kenya.


The difficulty in finding this gem of a story is hampered by Google, which is running flak for Obama: because if you search for “Kenyan-born US Senate” you won‘t find it, but if you search for the phrase without quotes you will find links which talk about it.

For those who believe what they see, here is the screen capture of the page from the Kenyan Sunday Standard, electronic edition, of June 27, 2004 — Just in case that page is scrubbed from the Web Archive:

Readers should take note that this AP story, was syndicated world-wide, so you should be able to find it in major newspapers, archived in libraries world-wide. If any reader does this, please let The Post & Email know, so that we can publish a follow up-story. You can scrub the net, but scrubbing libraries world-wide is not so easy.

Hanen of Sentinel Blog Radio broke the public news of the existence of this AP story at on October 14, 2009 at 12:31 pm. However, The Post & Email can confirm that a professional investigator had uncovered this story months ago, and that certified and authenticated copies of this report, meeting Federal Rules of evidence, have already been prepared and archived at many locations nationwide.

It should be noted that on January 8, 2006, the Honolulu Advertiser also reported that Barack Hussein Obama was born outside the United States.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/Jan/08/ln/FP601080334.html

A Chronology of Deceit

One can now ask an important question which has not yet been emphasized enough: “Just when did Obama begin to publically claim he was born in Hawaii?” This question is distinct from the question, “Just where in fact was Obama born?”, and from the other question, “What do official documents say about where he was born?”

Regarding his claims, we can summarize what is known:

1. As of Monday, Aug. 28, 2006, Obama’s Campaign was putting out that he was born in Hawaii. This is known from the introductory speech given by Prof. George A. O. Magoha, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Nairobi, on the occasion of a speech given there by Senator Obama that day. (One presumes that the Vice-Chancellor was given notes from the Obama campaign, as is customary on such occasions)

2. From the newspaper reports above, it is clear that the Obama campaign was putting out that he was born in Kenya, or overseas, during the period of June 27, 2004, until January 8, 2006.

3. In October of 2004, during the ABC Chicago Affiliate’s broadcast of the Obama-Keyes debates, Obama openly admitted — he conceded — that he was not a natural born citizen. (C-Span aired the uncut version of the debates, which contained this exchange, in the second half of April, 2005)

4. It is known from a classmate of Obama at Harvard University, that while at Harvard, Obama at least on one occasion admitted that he was born in Kenya. (This friend went on record on a call in radio program in Idaho in early July, 2009)

If any reader can find a link which documents a claim to a birth location before Aug. 28th, 2006, which differs from this timeline or which supports it; please let The Post & Email know of it, by posting it in the comment section below.

In a follow up report, The Post & Email has published a brief analysis of the Google Newspaper archive, which shows that Obama’s story changed after June 27, 2004.

Finally, that the AP did cover this story, reprinted by the East African Standard, can be seen from the citation made to AP stories about it (Jack Ryan dropping out of the race), in the following contemporary news articles, which however are incomplete:


June 25, 2004 — http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123716,00.html

June 26, 2004 — Bellview News Democrat

June 26, 2004 — AP Online Story by Michael Tarm

June 25, 2004 — AP Syndicated Story by Maura Kelly Lannan

(Second Source on June 26, 2009, which cites Associated Press Special Correspondent David Espo and reporter Dennis Conrad as contributors to this report)

(Third Source, The Ledger, print edition of June 26, 2009: partial republication)

Back to top

The Obama Administration's Inner Mao 奥巴马崇毛-用目的为手段辩护

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

用目的与动机为邪恶手段辩护是世界共产邪权的共同特征。 毛共与中共的对无辜人们的大屠杀至今仍被大多数中国的人们与美(西)左派因其所谓高尚动机所接受与回避只说明这些人们灵魂的堕落与腐败。 --- 陈凯

Using end to justify means is a prominent feature among all evil communist/Fascist regimes in the world. Mao and the Chinese communist regime's crime that has resulted a horrendous holocaust against innocent human beings is indeed a crime against all humanity. The Chinese people's, along with today's American and West's leftists' acceptance and worship of such murderous thugs, "justified" by the pretense of their lofty/utopian goals, only demonstrate how corrupt these people have become in their souls. --- Kai Chen


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

The Obama Administration's Inner Mao 奥巴马崇毛-用目的为手段辩护

Using End to Justify Means -- Mao's Murderous Core

By George Neumayr on 10.22.09 @ 6:09AM

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn says that her comment about Chairman Mao as one of her "favorite political philosophers" has been badly distorted. Perhaps she meant to say that Mao is one of her favorite media strategists.

It is telling what Dunn regards as a reassuring defense: that she was only extolling Mao's can-do attitude and that her admiration for it came from Lee Atwater. "The Mao quote is one I picked up from the late Republican strategist," she said. So now the reviled creator of the Willie Horton ad is someone Democrats feel they can safely hide behind?

According to Dunn, she was simply telling the high school graduates to imitate Mao's means, not his ends. Boy, what a relief. After all, his means were so blameless. "Figure out how to do things that have never been done before," she told the students. And how did Mao accomplish that again? By killing 40 to 60 million people?

What might be called dilettantish socialism, of which Dunn's bizarre graduation speech is a species (she thought it "ironic" to couple a mass-murderer with Mother Teresa in her motivational remarks to the graduates), is a recurring problem in this administration, and an expected one given that it reflects the sensibility of the boss.

Pressed by "Joe the Plumber" on the purpose of taxation, Obama fell back on the Marxist fragment "to spread the wealth around." His memoirs contain an oblique mention of a Marxist mentor. He learned his community organizing from Saul Alinsky and his liberation theology from Jeremiah Wright. He blurbed one of the books of a Marxist terrorist and "educator," Bill Ayers. And until recently, he was stocking his administration with figures like Van Jones, who openly talked of environmentalism as a tool of Marxist change.

That his communications director holds up Mao as a quote-worthy "political philosopher" fits into this picture nicely. And it is appropriate since White House aides are if nothing else pursuing a Maoist media strategy: control debates by trying to ban opponents from them. His press secretary Robert Gibbs even offered a Maoist-style take on Fox: it is motivated by "profit." Why would a company be trying to make profit? Perhaps its property should be confiscated.

But some reliable liberals are finding this Maoist media strategy a little too transparent for their taste. Dunn's anti-Fox antics were so ham-handed that not even Helen Thomas or Eugene Robinson on MSNBC could bring themselves to defend them.

It looked like a tired reprisal of an earlier popped trial balloon: Rahm Emanuel's unleashing of Paul Begala and James Carville in February on Rush Limbaugh in the hopes of driving a wedge between conservatives and moderate Republicans. That just increased Rush's profile and boomeranged back on Michael Steele.

Begala and Carville had been chosen for the task because they were outside the administration; Dunn, according to press accounts, was chosen for this one because she is an "interim" communications director and will soon be gone.

Fox is a "wing of the Republican party," declared Dunn. If that is true, does that make ABC the "west wing of the Democratic party"? Dunn can walk down the hall and chat about media bias with Linda Douglass, the ABC reporter turned Obama press aide.

And what about MSNBC? To use Howard Dean's phrase, it appears these days to be the Democratic wing of the Democratic party. The vast left-wing conspiracy has never been stronger. But to a Maoist, a ninety-percent-Democratic press corps just isn't good enough.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

甦曉康︰從德國經驗看文革 Contrast between Germany and China

德國Grey使用毛澤東、希特勒、本拉登形象作避孕套廣告 German Commercial

甦曉康︰從德國經驗看文革 Contrast between Germany and China

"毛澤東的畫像還掛在天安門城樓上、他的遺體還躺在對面的紀念堂里——請一個德國知識分子設想一下,假如二戰之後希特勒在德國還仍然享有這樣的待遇,德國民族還能反省第三帝國對猶太人的罪行嗎?他們還有能力認識“為什麼大多數人違反最基本的道德原則,而跟著偉大領袖走”嗎?中國官方在最權威的公共空間保護著這個“象征”,就保護了每一個文革參與者心里的“小毛澤東”——“同謀與受害者”這個雙重身份就不會瓦解;毛澤東就依然俯視著中國,而在他的注視之下,人們就不必理會受害者;而且,文革之後的一幕幕歷史,又一再加固了必須保住“毛澤東”這塊神牌的思路,因為他就是這個政權的來源。其實問題沒有那麼深奧︰德國民族跟著希特勒毀滅過一次,中國則沒有。" --- 甦曉康


作者 : 甦曉康 2009-10-21 3:00 AM

官方在最權威的公共空間保護著毛澤東這個“象征”,就保護了每一個文革參與者心里的“小毛澤東”——“同謀與受害者”這個雙重身份就不會瓦解;文革之後又一再加固了必須保住“毛澤東”這塊神牌的思路,因為他就是這個政權的來源。

今年法蘭克福書展很熱鬧。胡杰制作的卞仲雲死難紀錄片《我雖死去》,被譯成德語上了書展,由一個小出版社譯制,主人叫施威德茨克(Wolfgang M. Schwiedrzik),據說曾經是個“毛分子”,他的妻子則是大名鼎鼎的維也納大學漢學家甦珊娜·魏格林(Susanne Weigelin-Schwiedrzik),文革期間留學北京,學的是中共黨史。據說他們夫婦看了這個紀錄片,很震動,找到芝加哥大學的王友琴,聯絡上胡杰。

魏格林教授還寫過一篇《如何面對文化革命的歷史》,在網上很流行。自然,此文拿德國經驗(納粹)跟中國的文革經驗作對比,無疑極有價值,尤其她作的是關于罪與責的對比。我想,沒有哪個民族比德國人更有資格談這個問題。

同謀與受害的兩面性︰中德類比

假如我的理解無誤,她的一個重要觀點是︰希特勒曾使每一個崇拜者獲得滿足,由此也導致所有德國人都自覺是受害者,而拒絕面對真正的受害者;這種同謀者與受害者的“雙重身份”或“兩面性”,曾是一個重大障礙。

這種“雙重身份”的德國式尷尬,套用到中國官方的身上,果真非常合適——“存活下來”的鄧小平為首的整個中共體制,它的全部官員(走資派),當然也包括“保爹保媽”的高干子弟們,既是毛澤東的受害者,也是他的幫凶;更典型的,還要算是“副統帥”林彪集團、“小爬蟲”王關戚等,但沒能存活下來;不知道“四人幫”和陳伯達是不是也可以算上?其實在一定意義上,他們也是“受害者”——那就要看德國人怎麼界定戈林元帥和黨衛軍首領希姆萊。

至于民間,魏格林認為處于一種“記憶群體”分散、割裂狀態,大家各取所需、相互攻訐,因為“每一個人、每一個曾經參加過運動的階層、每一個政治團體都要從歷史經驗中尋找出能夠支撐重建其自尊的東西,同時又要設法忘卻與此目的不相關的東西”。這個觀察很準確,但是沒說原因——因為她不會知道,這恰好是官方所樂 見的一個局面。

毛澤東殺的都是本民族同類

說實話,西方漢學家看中國或中國歷史,總會給人感覺隔了一層什麼,何況文革這種雲山霧罩的歷史呢?魏格林能看到這個份兒上,已經是“火眼金楮”。不過,我還是想指出她某種“隔”的東西。

首先,主席與元首的區別——德國人跟希特勒的關系,與中國人跟毛澤東的關系,最不一樣的地方,是毛澤東從來沒有讓所有中國人都“自我滿足”、自豪過,恰好相反,這位梟雄在每一次不同的政治運動中,依次讓不同的社會階層跌入地獄,飽嘗挫折感、罪惡感、“另冊”感,他用“運動”群眾的這個法寶,變著花樣挑動中國老百姓互相批斗,把中國變成一座“古羅馬斗獸場”;“與人奮斗,其樂無窮”——這是希特勒絕對沒有的一種興趣,大概漢學家們也很難了解,若是曾經霧里看花地崇拜過毛澤東的,就更難了。

還有一層不同。納粹歧視非日耳曼人,專殺猶太人,也有個專用名詞,叫著“種族滅絕”(genocide);可是斯大林、毛澤東殺的大多是自己黨內的競爭者、 自己民族和國家的老百姓,這該叫個啥,好像還沒人發明個詞出來。這個區別,不是沒有意義的,因為它使“同謀加受害者”的雙重身份,更加曖昧,直接影響魏格林說的整個民族的“道德記憶重建”。

“全民族遺忘運動”

不可忽視的還有,在現實體制層面,第三帝國徹底崩潰,希特勒沒有任何繼承者存活下來,這使得德國人的反省沒有任何制度的阻力。這在中國恰好是一個相反的情形。魏格林問道︰“年輕一代為何不起來強烈要求公開討論文革的問題,這是一個難以理解的現象”。可是,為什麼她沒有問︰“中國當局為什麼至今不允許公開討 論文革?”而且,中國當局在“六四”以後所竭力施行的“全民族遺忘運動”,難道是國際社會和西方漢學界視而不見的嗎?今天中國的年輕人,除了還知道毛澤東是誰,對劉少奇、林彪、四人幫等一概聞所未聞,連二十年前的趙紫陽都很少有人知道了。這麼一個民族,你還指望她有道德記憶,不是異想天開嗎?

毛澤東的畫像還掛在天安門城樓上、他的遺體還躺在對面的紀念堂里——請一個德國知識分子設想一下,假如二戰之後希特勒在德國還仍然享有這樣的待遇,德國民族還能反省第三帝國對猶太人的罪行嗎?他們還有能力認識“為什麼大多數人違反最基本的道德原則,而跟著偉大領袖走”嗎?中國官方在最權威的公共空間保護著這個“象征”,就保護了每一個文革參與者心里的“小毛澤東”——“同謀與受害者”這個雙重身份就不會瓦解;毛澤東就依然俯視著中國,而在他的注視之下,人們就不必理會受害者;而且,文革之後的一幕幕歷史,又一再加固了必須保住“毛澤東”這塊神牌的思路,因為他就是這個政權的來源。其實問題沒有那麼深奧︰德國民族跟著希特勒毀滅過一次,中國則沒有。

(原載《動向》雜志2009年10月號)

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

White House Urges Other Networks to Disregard Fox News 奥巴马洗脑热

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

奥巴马当局的政宣洗脑热与他的媒体官员阿尼塔的崇毛病是一脉相承的。 共产社会主义者们都是想在“重建人性”中找出路的。 --- 陈凯

Obama administration's obsession with brainwashing American population is congruent with Obama's communication director Anita Dunn's worship of Mao. All communist/socialist dictators want to "reform/reinvent" human nature. --- Kai Chen


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

White House Urges Other Networks to Disregard Fox News 奥巴马洗脑热

Senior Obama administration officials took to the airwaves Sunday to accuse Fox News of pushing a particular point of view and not being a real news network.


FOXNews.com

Monday, October 19, 2009

The White House is calling on other news organizations to isolate and alienate Fox News as it sends out top advisers to rail against the cable channel as a Republican Party mouthpiece..

Top political strategists question the decision by the Obama administration to escalate its offensive against Fox News. And as of Monday, the four other major television networks had not given any indication that they intend to sever their ties with Fox News.

But several top White House officials have taken aim at Fox News since communications director Anita Dunn branded Fox "opinion journalism masquerading as news" in an interview last Sunday.

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN on Sunday that President Obama does not want "the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox."

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is "not a news organization."

"Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way," Axelrod counseled ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "We're not going to treat them that way."

Asked Monday about another Axelrod claim that Fox News is just trying to make money, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that while all media companies fall under that description, "I would say sometimes programming can be tilted toward accentuating those profits."

But by urging other news outlets to side with the administration, Obama officials dramatically upped the ante in the war of words that began earlier this month with Dunn's comments.

So far, none of the four other major networks has given any indication that they wish to disinvite Fox News from the White House pool -- the rotation through which the networks share the costs and duties of White House coverage and the most significant interaction among the news channels.

The White House stopped providing guests to "Fox News Sunday" after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in August.

Dunn said fact-checking an administration official was "something I've never seen a Sunday show do."

"She criticized 'Fox News Sunday' last week for fact-checking -- fact-checking -- an administration official," Wallace said Sunday. "They didn't say that our fact-checking was wrong. They just said that we had dared to fact-check."

"Let's fact-check Anita Dunn, because last Sunday she said that Fox ignores Republican scandals, and she specifically mentioned the scandal involving Nevada senator John Ensign," Wallace added. "A number of Fox News shows have run stories about Senator Ensign. Anita Dunn's facts were just plain wrong."

Fox News senior vice president Michael Clemente said: "Surprisingly, the White House continues to declare war on a news organization instead of focusing on the critical issues that Americans are concerned about like jobs, health care and two wars. The door remains open and we welcome a discussion about the facts behind the issues."

Observers on both sides of the political aisle questioned the White House's decision to continue waging war on a news organization, saying the move carried significant political risks.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile said on CNN: "I don't always agree with the White House. And on this one here I would disagree."

David Gergen, who has worked for Democratic and Republican presidents, said: "I totally agree with Donna Brazile." Gergen added that White House officials have "gotten themselves into a fight they don't necessarily want to be in. I don't think it's in their best interest."

"The faster they can get this behind them, the more they can treat Fox like one other organization, the easier they can get back to governing, and then put some people out on Fox," Gergen said on CNN. "I mean, for goodness sakes, you know, you engage in the debate.

"What Americans want is a robust competition of ideas, and they ought to be willing to go out there and mix it up with some strong conservatives on Fox, just as there are strong conservatives on CNN like Bill Bennett."

Bennett expressed outrage that Dunn told an audience of high school students this year that Mao Zedong, the founder of communist China, was one of "my favorite political philosophers."

"Having the spokesman do this, attack Fox, who says that Mao Zedong is one of the most influential figures in her life, was not...a small thing; it's a big thing," Bennett said on CNN. "When she stands up, in a speech to high school kids, says she's deeply influenced by Mao Zedong, that -- I mean, that is crazy."


Fox News contributor Karl Rove, who was the top political strategist to former President George W. Bush, said: "This is an administration that's getting very arrogant and slippery in its dealings with people. And if you dare to oppose them, they're going to come hard at you and they're going to cut your legs off."

"This is a White House engaging in its own version of the media enemies list. And it's unhelpful for the country and undignified for the president of the United States to so do," Rove added. "That is over- the-top language. We heard that before from Richard Nixon."

Media columnist David Carr of The New York Times warned that the White House war on Fox "may present a genuine problem for Mr. Obama, who took great pains during the campaign to depict himself as being above the fray of over-heated partisan squabbling."

"While there is undoubtedly a visceral thrill in finally setting out after your antagonists, the history of administrations that have successfully taken on the media and won is shorter than this sentence," Carr wrote over the weekend. "So far, the only winner in this latest dispute seems to be Fox News. Ratings are up 20 percent this year."

He added: "The administration, by deploying official resources against a troublesome media organization, seems to have brought a knife to a gunfight."

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Russia’s Leaders See China as Template for Ruling 中共新法西斯模式被世界效仿

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

China's Neo-Fascist mode of development is being fast emulated by authoritarian states in the world, even the left in the US is eyeing China with envy. The struggle between good and evil has never ceased. The world is approaching the biggest struggle between freedom and despotism since WWII. --- Kai Chen

中国所带头的新法西斯发展控制模式已在全球被专制社会所引用效仿。 甚至美国的左派们也对中共新法西斯模式飚以青睐。 正义与邪恶的斗争在人类历史上从未停止,也绝不会停止。 世界正在孕育着一场即将到来的自由与专制的大战。 --- 陈凯


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

News Analysis

Russia’s Leaders See China as Template for Ruling 中共新法西斯模式被世界效仿

CLIFFORD J. LEVY
Published: October 17, 2009

MOSCOW — Nearly two decades after the collapse of the Communist Party, Russia’s rulers have hit upon a model for future success: the Communist Party.

Wang Jianwei/Xinhua

Aleksandr D. Zhukov, a Russian deputy prime minister, praised the Chinese Communist Party at a meeting in Suifenhe, China.

Or at least, the one that reigns next door.

Like an envious underachiever, Vladimir V. Putin’s party, United Russia, is increasingly examining how it can emulate the Chinese Communist Party, especially its skill in shepherding China through the financial crisis relatively unbowed.

United Russia’s leaders even convened a special meeting this month with senior Chinese Communist Party officials to hear firsthand how they wield power.

In truth, the Russians express no desire to return to Communism as a far-reaching Marxist-Leninist ideology, whether the Soviet version or the much attenuated one in Beijing. What they admire, it seems, is the Chinese ability to use a one-party system to keep tight control over the country while still driving significant economic growth.

It is a historical turnabout that resonates, given that the Chinese Communists were inspired by the Soviets, before the two sides had a lengthy rift.

For the Russians, what matters is the countries’ divergent paths in recent decades. They are acutely aware that even as Russia has endured many dark days in its transition to a market economy, China appears to have carried out a fairly similar shift more artfully.

The Russians also seem almost ashamed that their economy is highly dependent on oil, gas and other natural resources, as if Russia were a third world nation, while China excels at manufacturing products sought by the world.

“The accomplishments of China’s Communist Party in developing its government deserve the highest marks,” Aleksandr D. Zhukov, a deputy prime minister and senior Putin aide, declared at the meeting with Chinese officials on Oct. 9 in the border city of Suifenhe, China, northwest of Vladivostok. “The practical experience they have should be intensely studied.”

Mr. Zhukov invited President Hu Jintao, general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, to United Russia’s convention, in November in St. Petersburg.

The meeting in Suifenhe capped several months of increased contacts between the political parties. In the spring, a high-level United Russia delegation visited Beijing for several days of talks, and United Russia announced that it would open an office in Beijing for its research arm.

The fascination with the Chinese Communist Party underscores United Russia’s lack of a core philosophy. The party has functioned largely as an arm of Mr. Putin’s authority, even campaigning on the slogan “Putin’s Plan.” Lately, it has championed “Russian Conservatism,” without detailing what exactly that is.

Indeed, whether United Russia’s effort to learn from the Chinese Communist Party is anything more than an intellectual exercise is an open question.

Whatever the motivation, Russia in recent years has started moving toward the Chinese model politically and economically. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia plunged into capitalism haphazardly, selling off many industries and loosening regulation. Under Mr. Putin, the government has reversed course, seizing more control over many sectors.

Today, both countries govern with a potent centralized authority, overseeing economies with a mix of private and state industries, although the Russians have long seemed less disciplined in doing so.

Corruption is worse in Russia than China, according to global indexes, and foreign companies generally consider Russia’s investment climate less hospitable as well, in part because of less respect for property rights.

Russia has also been unable to match China in modernizing roads, airports, power plants and other infrastructure. And Russia is grappling with myriad health and social problems that have reduced the average life expectancy for men to 60. One consequence is a demographic crisis that is expected to drag down growth.

The world financial crisis accentuated comparisons between the economies, drawing attention to Moscow’s policies. In June, the World Bank projected that China’s economy would grow by 7.2 percent in 2009, while Russia’s would shrink by 7.9 percent.

Politically, Russia remains more open than China, with independent (though often co-opted) opposition parties and more freedom of speech. The most obvious contrast involves the Internet, which is censored in China but not in Russia.

Even so, Mr. Putin’s political aides have long studied how to move the political system to the kind that took root for many decades in countries like Japan and Mexico, with a de facto one-party government under a democratic guise, political analysts said. The Russians tend to gloss over the fact that in many of those countries, long-serving ruling parties have fallen.

The Kremlin’s strategy was apparent in regional elections last week, when United Russia lieutenants and government officials used strong-arm tactics to squeeze out opposition parties, according to nonpartisan monitoring organizations. United Russia won the vast majority of contests across the country.

Far behind was the Russian Communist Party, which styles itself as the successor to the Soviet one and has some popularity among older people. The Russian Communists have also sought to build ties to their Chinese brethren, but the Chinese leadership prefers to deal with Mr. Putin’s party.

The regional elections highlighted how the Russian government and United Russia have become ever more intertwined. State-run television channels offer highly favorable coverage of the party, and the courts rarely if ever rule against it. United Russia leaders openly acknowledged that they wanted to study how the Chinese maintained the correct balance between the party and government.

“We are interested in the experience of the party and government structures in China, where cooperation exists between the ruling party and the judicial, legislative and executive authorities,” Vladimir E. Matkhanov, a deputy in Russia’s Parliament, said at the Suifenhe meeting, according to a transcript.

United Russia praises the Chinese system without mentioning its repressive aspects. And the party’s stance also appears to clash with repeated declarations by Mr. Putin, the former president and current prime minister, and President Dmitri A. Medvedev that Russia needs a robust multiparty system to thrive.

The two endorsed the results of Sunday’s local elections, despite widespread reports of fraud, prompting opposition politicians to call their words hollow.

Sergei S. Mitrokhin, leader of Yabloko, a liberal, pro-Western party that was trounced, said the elections revealed the Kremlin’s true aspirations. And the China talks made them all the more clear, Mr. Mitrokhin said.

“To me, the China meeting demonstrated that United Russia wants to establish a single-party dictatorship in Russia, for all time,” he said.

Throughout recent centuries, Russia has flirted with both the West and East, its identity never quite settled, and analysts said that under Mr. Putin, the political leadership had grown scornful of the idea that the country had to embrace Western notions of democracy or governing.

That in part stems from the backlash stirred in the 1990s, after the Soviet fall, when Russia faced economic hardship and political chaos, which many Putin supporters say the West helped to cause.

Dmitri Kosyrev, a political commentator for Russia’s state news agency and author of detective novels set in Asia, said it was only natural that the Kremlin would cast its gaze to the East.

“When they discovered that there was a way to reform a formally socialist nation into something much better and more efficient, of course they would take note,” Mr. Kosyrev said. “Everyone here sees China as the model, because Russia is not the model.”

Anita Dunn: Why is being a fan of Mao more acceptable than being a fan of Hitler? 美左崇毛可被接受?

Anita Dunn: Why is being a fan of Mao more acceptable than being a fan of Hitler? 美左崇毛可被接受?

Youtube Link: “Anita Dunn 崇拜毛泽东”视频链锁: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAXAivdHYW0

Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

Thursday, October 15th at 11:31PM EDT

Anita Dunn is Barack Obama’s Communications Director.

She tried starting a war with Fox News that left even leftwing commentators scratching their heads calling Obama a wimp. Claiming that Fox News is part of the right wing echo chamber, Dunn ran to CNN to complain about Fox News not offering sexual favors to Obama like . . . well . . . CNN and the other networks.

How dare it maintain its integrity!?!

Well, thanks to our friend Glenn Beck, we have Anita Dunn on tape declaring her favorite philosopher is Mao — the Chinese Hitler. Mao led the communist revolution in China and became China’s dictatorial and insanely paranoid leader.

Hitler sought to exterminate a whole race of citizen. Mao decided to exterminate all of his citizens, or at least significant classes of citizenry, driving many to suicide to avoid ritualistic violence at the hands of Mao’s red brigade. Mao’s response? “China is such a populous nation, it is not as if we cannot do without a few people.”

Mao’s political and philosophical writings read like Hitler’s Mein Kampf. He drove the educated classes to starvation. Kids were put in charge of adults. Educated workers were forced to work in fields. He fostered a cult of personality that affects China even today.

She describes Mao as not just her favorite political philosopher, but one of the “two people I turn to most.” The other, tragically or humorously depending on your frame of mind, being Mother Teresa. I can bet you that between the two it is not Mother Teresa who Anita Dunn looks to for guidance on abortion policy.

How in God’s name is it acceptable for the woman in charge of the White House’s communications shop to declare Hitler her favorite philosopher? The answer is that it is not. Why then is Mao acceptable?