How Much Do You Have to Hate Someone Not to Proselytize?

Francis Schaeffer on the Origins of Relativism in the Church

One of My Favorite Songs

An Inspiring Song


Friday, April 13, 2012

Look at the Map and Think

NOTE TO MY LIBERAL FRIENDS (of course I have liberal friends, some more liberal than others): This post is not really addressed to you, though you may want to consider what I have to say. Your hearts, I am convinced, are in the right place, even if I think your political thinking has been seriously compromised. This post is addressed to the hard leftists, the thoroughgoing statists, the communists-in-all-but-name, those men and women who know full well that if ever they made a complete public avowal of their real ambitions for America, they would never win another national election and would most likely be run out of town on a rail. It is addressed, sadly, to those driving the train of the Democratic Party. Even for them, I have some sympathy, for whether sooner or later, disaster will inevitably overtake them--it always does, just ask Robespierre--and I wish their fate on no man.

As I write, the polling on the race for president is a bit up and down. Some polling shows Mitt Romney--almost certainly the Republican nominee--with an advantage over Barack Obama. Some shows just the reverse. Some makes it look like a toss-up.

I cannot help but think that there is a good--a very good--chance that Barack Obama will be re-elected, yet I am dead certain that, geographically speaking, most of the country doesn't want him. If he is re-elected, it will be because of his strength in more heavily populated, urbanized areas, and even there, because he has successfully demonized his Republican opponent, and because he has lied through his teeth about his background, his political ambitions, and his record. There is no other way. Not enough people want what he is selling. Even his signature achievement, ObamaCare, was achieved only through political skulduggery of the first water and is opposed by a majority of the people. His only hope is to convince an electorate that, in general, barely pays attention to politics until two weeks before the election, that his opponent would be even worse.

And I know that you will be out there, indeed, are already out there, hoping fervently, praying fervently to whatever god it is that you worship (if any), working feverishly to help him do it. You think that if he wins, the long-term success of your ideas, ideas that have never been successful anywhere on the globe, at any time in history, is assured. You think that you will be co-heirs, if not co-rulers, of the kingdom you think you see coming.

You are practically salivating at the thought of victory, aren't you? At the thought of ramming your ideology down the throats of those of us who've long opposed you? I know that you are. I've heard you talk, read what you have to say.

Allow me to suggest that you look again at the map--this map, the county-by-county map of the results of the last presidential election. The one that shows a vast sea of red, with some large blue spots and a number of smaller ones.

It is just as--I know you hate the very sound of his name, but I'm going to say it anyway--Rush Limbaugh has said: Republicans can win most of the counties in the country and still lose the election.

And it is over this that you hope to rule without challenge? Over this vast expanse of land, at least fifty percent of the inhabitants thereof being opposed to your agenda now, and with more who will turn against you as your true nature and agenda becomes progressively more apparent? They will, you know. I know you know. I know you know because you virtually never run under your true colors. You wouldn't dare, not in a national race. You are perpetually running your candidates as centrists, opposed to Republicans whom you relentlessly accuse of "extremism," though their views are well within the mainstream of historical American politics. That this works as often as it does does not mean that Americans are leftists, friends. It means that they prefer, if possible, almost reflexively, to avoid perceived extremes and to be fair, and that you have successfully bamboozled them, lied to them, bewildered them, taken merciless advantage of the fact that you can make most Americans jump through hoops of fire by suggesting that circumstances aren't fair. It means they have given you credit for sincerity that you do not deserve.

It cannot last forever.

I know that you will not listen, but you will not be able to say that I have not warned you. Listen well to one of the wisest statesmen of all time, the right honorable Edmund Burke:
...ask yourselves this question, Will they be content in such a state of slavery? If not, look to the consequences. Reflect how you are to govern a people who think they ought to be free and think they are not.

Different Flavors of Ti*

*Some will quibble, no doubt, that this post would have been more accurately named "Different Flavors of Tuite," but if I had done that, I would have missed the opportunity for an outrageous pun.

You can find more than a little "tuite" on YouTube these days. It is not my intention to get into a spitting contest with anyone on the subject. I make no bones about who I am and what I think: I am a very junior member of the RyuTe Renmei, and what I think is that A)Taika Oyata is the foremost exponent of tuite-jutsu and kyusho-jutsu that I have seen, met, or heard of; B)that we in the United States are darned lucky to have him; and C) that both his tuite and kyusho are different from what goes under those names in other organizations.

Note that I have not said "better" or "worse". I have simply noted that in my opinion, it is different. For purposes of comparison, here are a few video clips, for the handful of people who might be interested.

First, here is Joel Reeves:

Mr. Reeves, in turn, was apparently a student of Higa Seitoku, seen here:

Higa Seitoku, in turn, was a student of this man, Uehara Seikichi:

Here is Toma Shian, who was, if I'm not mistaken, was another of Uehara Seikichi's students:

And lastly, here is Taika Seiyu Oyata, who was a training partner of Uehara's, but learnt, if I understand my history correctly, his tuite as the result of his kata analysis under the instruction of Uhugushuku no Tanmei, and the two systems--Uehara's and Oyata's--are identifiably different. This sums it up about as well as I have read anywhere. Emphasis is mine:
After WWII in 1946, Taika met Uhugushuku Tan Mei (95 yrs.), a former bushi, who had been in service to the Okinawan emperor....Mr. Uhugushuku taught Taika fighting theory, history, how to study technique, and the weapons kata used in Ryu Te®....He also taught Taika that all kata contained Tuite, And Taika was encouraged to look further into kata to discover their hidden meanings.
Because of his abilities, Taika was introduced to other karate masters to further his knowledge. One such instructor was Wakinaguri Tan Mei, a large heavy set Chinese about the same age as Uhugushuku, who specialized in nerve and blood vessel striking techniques; Kyushu Jitsu. Wakinaguri taught him the bodies weak points and vital areas as well as how to strike them. With this knowledge, Taika began to analytically research kata to discover their hidden meanings...As his search for knowledge continued, Taika joined an analyzing and research group with Seikichi Uehara, the only living student of Choyu Motobu. Uehara is famous for a form of Tuite and weapons fighting that dates back to the 1600's and passed down solely through the Motobu family. Taika began working with Uehara comparing the two systems of tuite and weapons fighting.
But I suppose you can look at the video and form your own opinions, can't you?