Greg Krehbiel's Crowhill Weblog - Content

crow
A multi-author blog with a range of opinions on news, culture, politics, beer, art, science, education, religion and life


Please also visit Crowhill Publishing for information on good books by Greg Krehbiel





Panic first, data later

by Greg Krehbiel on 16 May 2013

When the story on the increase in sexual assault in the military came out I was certain there was more to it. For example, bad data, redefined terms, phony accusations, etc.

Now this.

Polling Experts Question Pentagon Sexual Assault Survey

The first to present his case seems just, until another comes along and examines him. (Proverb something or other.)

The thing is, 84% of surveys aren’t used to get information, but to promote an agenda.

-- 3 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-16  ::  Greg Krehbiel





Don’t believe anything coming out of the White House

by Greg Krehbiel on 16 May 2013

Their lies are becoming almost comical.

The Benghazi story was absurd, as anyone could tell from the beginning.

Now they’re trying to blame the IRS scandal on lower-level officials in Cleveland, but 10 of 12 of the offices are in Washington.

The mendacity of this White House is beyond belief, and I hope it’s finally catching up with them.

-- 2 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-16  ::  Greg Krehbiel





Big government = tyranny

by Greg Krehbiel on 14 May 2013

You really ought to read George Will’s column. In IRS scandal, echoes of Watergate

Five days before the IRS story broke, Obama, sermonizing 109 miles northeast of Cincinnati, warned Ohio State graduates about “creeping cynicism” and “voices” that “warn that tyranny is .?.?. around the corner.” Well.

Here’s part of what Obama said.

They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.

The president is delusional. Tyranny is always just around the corner. Power corrupts. More power = more corruption.

Tyranny is a constant danger, but it’s not the only danger. The size and reach of the government is itself a danger, because it enables tinkering and empowers the tinkerers. The danger is not only that some Hitler type will come along — although that is a danger. The more likely scenario is that some lunatic bureaucrat with a silly idea will cause all kinds of trouble, simply because he has the power of a bloated government behind him.

Like this. Immigrants? We sent out search parties to get them to come… and made it hard for Britons to get work, says Mandelson

They figured they needed to change the demographic profile of Briton, so they intentionally brought in immigrants to change it.

Who gave them that right? Nobody. But they had the power, so they did it.

It’s not a question of whether you have a good big government or a bad big government. Big government is dangerous, in and of itself.

--  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-14  ::  Greg Krehbiel





No “there there” on Benghazi?

by Greg Krehbiel on 14 May 2013

Obama is trying desperately to convince the country that there’s no story in the Benghazi mess. Fewer and fewer people are accepting his spin. The Washington Post is giving some of his recent statements four Pinocchios.

There are still a lot of questions to be answered about Benghazi, including …

  • On the 9/11 immediately after the death of OBL, why weren’t they better prepared for an attack?
  • When it was obvious there was an attack, who failed to order an appropriate response?
  • Who ordered the Marines who were ready to respond to stand down?
  • What time did Obama go to sleep that night — while our Ambassador was fighting for his life?
  • Why was a fundraiser in Las Vegas the next morning more important than dealing with the crisis?
  • Who came up with the silly story about the Youtube video and why?
  • Why did they continue to push that story for a week after the attack when it was transparently false?
  • Why did the President, the Vice President and the Secretary of State lie to Pat Smith (mother of one of the Americans killed in Benghazi) about the Youtube video?
  • The president promised an investigation into the attack and he promised that the perpetrators would be brought to justice. What has happened?

If we had a watchdog press, rather than a lapdog press, this story could have received the attention it deserved before the election. Now we’re shackled with this lying, power-grabbing Chicago politician for a second term — which is already shaping up to be a scandal-ridden disaster.

-- 3 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-14  ::  Greg Krehbiel





You can’t just keep giving stuff away!

by Greg Krehbiel on 14 May 2013

When are we going to learn?

We measure politicians by how much they promise to give us — by which we mean what they promise to rob from everyone else and redistribute to us. The consequence is a political class that is always finding new ways to mandate this and promise that … and pay for it later, if at all.

The mandates, fees, taxes and so on in Obamacare are predicted to result in a 100%-400% Obamacare rate explosion.

-- 1 comment  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-14  ::  Greg Krehbiel





When facts clash with policy

by Greg Krehbiel on 13 May 2013

There are certain things you can’t say. Truth is no defense.

See The IQ Test

He allegedly shows that Hispanic immigrants, even after several generations, had lower IQs than non-Hispanic whites. Note: I’m not saying he’s right.

It doesn’t matter if he’s right. There are some things you aren’t allowed to say in contemporary society. We have to keep repeating our “useful fictions” no matter what the evidence says.

--  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-13  ::  Greg Krehbiel





The duck dude stands his ground

by Greg Krehbiel on 13 May 2013

I’ve never seen the show, and doubt I agree with much of what the guy says, but I’m glad he stood by his principles.

Duck Dynasty will continue to include references to God and guns.

--  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-13  ::  Greg Krehbiel





If this had happened under Bush …

by Greg Krehbiel on 10 May 2013

… we’d never hear the end of it.

IRS Apologizes for Targeting Conservative Groups

Every abuses authority. Everybody. That’s why we can’t trust authority, and that’s why we need effective checks and balances.

The media is supposed to be one of those checks, but they are so transparently biased they regularly fail in that role.

If this had happened under a Republican administration, the media would question and badger and investigate and whine and moan for months.

The liberal media will “cover” it. They’ll mention it. They’ll say it was a bad thing. Then they’ll move on.

The difference is often not in whether or not they cover a story, but in how they cover it, and how dogged they are in pursuing it.

-- 10 comments  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-10  ::  Greg Krehbiel





Follow the frog!

by Greg Krehbiel on 9 May 2013

This is a funny video.

-- 1 comment  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-09  ::  Greg Krehbiel





An interesting perspective on SSM

by Greg Krehbiel on 7 May 2013

I don’t agree with everything that’s being said here, but it’s an interesting perspective.

John Milbank: Gay Marriage a “Strategic Move” That Has Nothing to Do with Gay Rights

Kinship — defined by blood relations — is a social order that predates the state. There are lots of relations that depend on kinship. The state recognizes it, relies on it, and in some ways promotes it, but the state doesn’t create it.

Same-sex “marriage,” on the other hand, is an invention of the state, and as you start to delve into the details of it, different rules will inevitably apply to it. For example, there is no “consummation” of a same-sex marriage in the same way there is a heterosexual marriage. There are no natural children of a same-sex marriage. And, as I’ve said before, we might find ourselves in the weird situation where a man can marry his brother but not his sister.

As the law tries to wade through all this stuff and work out the details, it may demand that all marriages — same sex or opposite sex — be treated equally. This could result in opposite-sex marriage being stripped of some things related to kinship. For example, the natural children of an opposite-sex union might not be considered the children of the marriage without a state-approved “adoption.”

Heterosexual exchange and reproduction has always been the very “grammar” of social relating as such. The abandonment of this grammar would thus imply a society no longer primarily constituted by extended kinship, but rather by state control and merely monetary exchange and reproduction.

I find the original article (which is hard to read) a little too paranoid for my tastes, but he raises some interesting legal issues that may come out of same-sex marriage.

One thing is very clear, in my opinion. The idea that recognizing same-sex marriage is not going to change all other marriages is naive nonsense.

… we have sleep-walked into the legalisation of practices whose logic and implications have never been seriously debated

To quote Mr. Spock, “That much is certain.”

--  ::  What do you think?  ::  2013-05-07  ::  Greg Krehbiel