AYN CLOUTER

For my latest rants see my new:

AYN CLOUTER'S BLOG

The new web log is much more frequently updated, and even has built-in Commenting, so you can lavish praise or nitpick typos. Come on over and join the fun.

THE ZEROTH COMMANDMENT

Let me throw a bone to the mealy-mouthed moderate mutts nipping at my well-turned ankles. They've accused me of violating Ronald Reagan's Eleventh Commandment -- "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican". I have nothing but good words for one Republican who is the true unsung hero of the fight over the Ten Commandments monument in Alabama. That man is Tony Scalia. The Justice for Opus Dei, who didn't let the precedents of his own decisions stand in the way of his picking the President of the United States, has struck another mighty blow against liberals. Think of him like Charlton Heston: he has brought down for us a new Zeroth Commandment.

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore has now become a hero to the religious right for erecting and fighting to keep that monument at the State Judicial Building in Montgomery. When he asked the U.S. Supreme Court to let it stay there longer pending his appeal, they refused. Since a majority is not required to issue an emergency stay, and since Saint Scalia can control his converted clone Clarence "Porn Watcher" Thomas, dominate doddering Bill "Poll Watcher" Rehnquist, and manipulate the hungry to be next Chief Justice "Tony The Lesser" Kennedy, there is no doubt that he could have done this if he had wanted to. The question which has not even occurred to short-sighted liberals, gleeful about their supposed victory over the insidious theocrats, is why didn't he want to stop the removal of the monument, even temporarily? Not only was my hero Scalia thinking several moves ahead of the liberals, but they didn't even realize what game he was playing.

Some might think Scalia wanted the monument removed to stir up conservative crusaders and gain Moore popularity as a martyr. It did both of those things. Just look at this picture of Moore's rants rousing a rally of raging religious rednecks.

Those like me who are not old enough to remember it ourselves have no doubt seen in the history books the famous picture of another state elected official in Alabama standing at the door to a government building.

George Wallace lost that confrontation with federal power at the schoolhouse door in 1963, just as Moore has forty years later. Yet Wallace became so popular as a result that he served sixteen years as Governor and ran for President several times, scaring Democrats out of their few remaining wits. In fact, he became such a threat to them that he was not just symbolically but literally emasculated by a well-placed bullet in 1972. Wasn't that the summer that a certain Yale student, who had visited Moscow, went wandering around the country helping the mad McGovern campaign in places like Texas? Perhaps Vince Foster wasn't the first victim -- but I digress.

How conservative is Alabama? Recall this photo posted on the internet as "the Alabama Air National Guard in traditional uniforms". This should make it clear why George Bush chose to transfer his National Guard pilot duty to that state, just in case some unaware officer had mistaken him for one of the little people who actually had to show up for work.

Patriotic Bible-thumping Alabama elected Roy Moore Chief Justice because of the publicity he gained by posting the Ten Commandments in his own district courtroom. Even though the state judicial ethics commission may remove him from office now for defying a federal order, he is already being touted as a credible candidate for Governor.

Since the current Republican Governor there, Bob Riley, is busily trying to get voters to approve a September referendum to increase taxes on the rich, Moore should slaughter him among the enlightened wealth-respecting voters in the party primary. Riley says he thinks the Alabama tax system is too regressive, based on his Christian belief in helping the poor. Eleventh Commandment or not, such bleeding-heart nonsense means he doesn't belong in the modern Republican Party. His argument is another clue to the real reason Scalia was willing to let the monument be removed. It has nothing to do with helping Roy Moore and defeating an apostate Governor -- that is just frosting on the cake.

Someone with a more devious mind may turn to another explanation. An ongoing filibuster by the hypocritical democracy-opposing Democrats in the U.S. Senate is blocking Bush's nomination to the federal appeals court of Alabama State Attorney General Bill Pryor. He had been accused of putting his own religious views ahead of the law. Yet in this case, though he made it clear he favors the monument, he has supported the enforcement of the federal court order removing it, saying "No man is above the law."

The whole incident is like a script to prove Democratic accusations against Pryor are just partisan propaganda. Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, read his own lines well, saying "We feel betrayed. We worked for this guy, and he sold us out because he wants a new job." In fact, all Pryor said is he wants everybody to obey the orders from the top, where he expects to be before long after getting to play the good guy in the white hat in this case. You can bet he would then favor putting the monument back again. So it may look like Scalia is making a sacrifice fly, giving up something that he expects to get back later on (the monument), so that he can help Bush pack the courts with more Scalia clones. Sorry, but that's not it either -- that's just more gravy on the side. The Justice really does not want that monument there.

What does the monument say that upsets him? Look at this picture of it.

One web site (which must be a good conservative one, since it uses for its name the Pentagon's slogan of "Shock And Awe"), has pointed out that this monument not only skips over the question of which of the versions of the Ten Commandments in the Bible to use, but that "Roy Moore -- or whoever created the graven image for him -- engaged in some selective editing of what they apparently believe is the literal, word-for-word-inspired, Word of God." Read their extensive analysis on this page. Despite their no doubt good intentions, they have fallen into a lawyer's trap. The old saying is "If you get them arguing about the wrong question, then you don't have to worry about what answer they come up with." Don't focus on what was left out. Look at the dangerous text that is still there.

The idiotic tax-code liberalism of Alabama's Governor Riley is one example of the mistaken ideas people can form when they try to read the Bible for themselves. This is why Scalia's church has not encouraged ordinary people to do so. This monument displays another text constantly being abused by appeasers of evil, the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." How many times has Scalia had to shoot down foolish arguments that this prohibits the death penalty, our only lasting protection against typical liberals like the Rosenbergs? Being not only holier than the Pope, but also a much better lawyer, he has courageously stood up against even the fuzzy-minded liberal senility of the Vatican itself on this issue.

Endangering executions is just the tip of the liberal iceberg here. Take the whole concept of "an eye for an eye". Where did this idea come from? IRAQ!! It's an adaptation from the code of that spineless criminal-appeasing wimp, Hammurabi of Babylon, which was then watered down even further by that proto-liberal, Moses. As one site says, "This law was a form of mercy. The original intent of the law was to limit vengeance. In the earliest days of tribal society, blood feuds were a characteristic. If a man of one tribe injured a man of another tribe, it wasn't unusual for all the members of the tribe of the injured man to quickly move to take vengeance on all the members of the tribe of the man who committed the injury. And usually, the vengeance desired was nothing less than death. ... An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth lays it down that only the man who committed the crime is to be punished, and his punishment must be no more than equal to the damage he inflicted."

Why limit retaliation to just the individual, and not his whole family or tribe? If the liberals say society is to blame for a criminal's acts, then let's get rid of his bad society, including his family, his neighborhood, and his whole city. If Bush had followed this strategy in Iraq, would he be facing increasing terrorism there now? He should have taken the approach of Abbot Arnaud-Armaury at the siege of Beziers during the Albigensian Crusade against French heretics: "Kill them all. God will know his own."

There were no more snipers in Lidice after German troops destroyed it. Carthage did not trouble Rome any more after it was burned to the ground. Historians now doubt the legend that the Romans actually sowed the ground there with salt, but that may have been because they ran out of funds after a long war. Today, we have the power to cover the land with radioactive salts (cobalt would work well) which would prevent anyone from living there for many years to come. What holds us back? Spineless catering to liberal world opinion, which keeps shouting "Hiroshima" and "Nagasaki". Has Japan attacked anyone since? Those bombs were trivial "moderate" ones. Now we could wipe out all of Baghdad with one missile. Show some real cojones, George!!

One popular leftist propagandist was a Russian immigrant named Isaac Asimov, who showed his Marxist mind-set with his science-fiction series about one more liberal foundation of "psychotic historians" overthrowing the noble rulers of the galaxy. He also wrote stories, loved by liberal technocratic geeks, about robots. In these he set forth the "Three Laws of Robotics", which prevented machines from harming people. When later he realized these did not say anything about helping the poor downtrodden masses, he added another law that was even more important than those three, calling it the "Zeroth Law". Maybe we can make him turn over in his grave by adapting his wording to name Scalia's discovery.

William Seward, one of the founders of the Republican Party, used to say there is a Higher Law than the Constitution. He was right, but it isn't the Ten Commandments. Scalia has cut through all that wishy-washy liberalism to a principle so basic that Jehovah never even bothered to mention it. In the world of the Old Testament, this one was taken for granted. For examples, see the story of Sodom and Gomorrah [Genesis 19:24-27], or the destruction of the followers of Korah by earthquake and plague [Numbers 16:31-35 and 46-49], or the slaughter of the Midianites including women and children [Numbers 31:7-18].

The ultimate, "Zeroth Commandment", which Scalia is following is simple: Thou shalt totally destroy thy enemies. (And as George Bush might add, imitating Moses in that last passage from Numbers, Leave no child behind.) Since he obeys this higher law, we can count on Scalia not only to go on supporting the death penalty. He will also uphold purging of black Democratic voters from the rolls in Florida, redistricting to grab more seats in Congress from Democrats in Texas, and recalls of Democratic Governors in California and other states. Merely winning is not enough. Scalia is one Republican who will stand bravely for total destruction of the liberals. This man is a far-sighted hero for our time.

--AC August 30, 2003

Ayn Clouter Is Such A Turn On -- Check out her latest outrage -- She's so much sexier than Ann Coulter. Rock on, Ayn. -- ntodd

Ayn,

Have just read your commentary on the Alabama Ten Commandments controversy, and it is brilliant as usual. However, as was the case with your Jaywalking piece, you left out part of the story.

You mention how the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" is abused by liberals to oppose the death penalty. But how about their abuse of another commandment, "Thou shalt not bear false witness", to oppose the Iraq War? Here we see liberals being their all-too-typically hypocritical selves. When their beloved Clenis dishonored the office of the President and earned for himself a well-deserved impeachment by lying about getting a hummer, the liberals fell all over themselves making excuses. But let President George W Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld make a few honest mis-statements of fact about Iraq in the course of making the case for the war, and suddenly the liberals remember about that commandment right after the one about adultery. More proof, if any were needed, of Scalia's wisdom in removing the commandments from the sight of those liberal jackals. The fewer commandments there are, the less chance for liberal hypocrits to hijack them for their own unholy purposes.

Btw, regarding the insidious Asimov, the rot spreads deeper than you think! See http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/newtlist.html.

Best regards,

A CONCERNED AMERICAN

and irregular columnist ayn clouter reminds us she's still keeping america safe from free thought. --skippy

Back to main page.