Garbanzo Toons

More Free Press Reaction

In the previous post I forgot to mention that in one of the propaganda pieces the Free Press ran, someone gave the bogus analogy of Muslims being subjected to the same senseless discrimination that other ethnic groups were forced to endure when they first came to these shores. That is more fantasy. No other ethnic group came to these shores demanding that we give up our ways in order to follow their ways. And we have to do it for Muslims in order to remain sensitive to their needs, so we don't humiliate them, and because others have suffered in the past. Oh, and because if we don't, some misguided Muslim might, through a misinterpretation of that holy book of peace, tolerance, and love, the Qu'ran, become violent toward the United States.

So halal food must be served in schools that Muslim children attend. Prayer rooms and foot baths should be set up for Islamic usage - oh wait - anyone, not only Muslims, can use them, but the prayer rooms must be segregated by sex because you-know-which-religion demands it, and the foot baths - who else would really think of using them? During Ramadan we shouldn't eat or drink in the presence of a fasting Muslim. So we'd better be fluent in the Muslim calender. Health clubs and public swimming pools should have women only hours so that Muslim women aren't forced to exercise in the leering presence of a man.

When a Muslim or Muslims have launched or are caught preparing a terror attack we are strictly forbidden to entertain the slightest thought that it is a terror attack by Muslims. We are encouraged to suspect any person or any group on the political right. And once it is conclusively proven that Muslims were involved, we must agree, under the pain of being called an "Islamophobe" that the perpetrator(s) are either insane or perverting the teachings of yada, yada, yada . . .

They must be allowed to murder their daughters if their daughters stray from daddy's will. They can beat their wives. They are entitled to welfare as soon as they enter the country. (I think that is true of all new immigrants though). My grandparents had to work. And so did all of the other immigrants from all of the other nations of the Earth who came to the United States in search for a better life. And the only favor they expected was to be allowed to work in order to better their own and their children's lives. No accommodation were expected by them or made for them. Sensitivity to their old country cultural norms if one of their community was arrested? Yeah, right. They were expected to learn the language - English, that is - and become Americans.

So don't try and make me believe that Muslims are just like any other ethnic or religious group in this country. It simply isn't true. No other group in the history of this nation has demanded so much while contributing so little (well, except maybe for teenagers, but most people grow out of that.) No group has been so adept at developing unearned whining to the art form it has become. They've quickly learned to take advantage of the surfeit of liberal guilt that is eating away at the fabric of our nation. Responsibility for their actions? Forget it. It's always somebody else's fault.

Like others have said, Muslims, like everybody else are welcome to come to this country. But if they are going to become Americans, then they have to adapt to American society. Don't expect me to adapt to Islamic society because I will not submit.

Labels: "islamophobia", Detroit Free Press, immigration, islam, Muslims

posted by Harry @ 5:44 PM 1 comments

Shills for Islam

The Detroit Free Press has gone into full pro-Islamic propaganda mode today, the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. There are two articles and an editorial all about the strain on Muslims since that fateful day and about how members of all monotheistic faiths are coming together to promote tolerance, and battle intolerance, and to let the world know about the tiny minority of Muslims who pervert a religion of peace, and-. But let's face it. We've been force fed this crap for the past nine years, and it is still a load of crap.

The Free Press managed to interview people of differing religions to get their 9/11 stories, and wouldn't you know it, they all agree that because of that attack, innocent Muslims have been unfairly maligned, and these fine folk have gone out of their way to improve relations between themselves and people of other faiths. The deaths of the almost 3000 Americans murdered that day actually made the interviewees better people. Wasn't that a lucky break for them? And it helped make the United States a more moral nation - well, except for that war stuff, you know, when President Bush made that reactionary, non-progressive, non-enlightened decision to fight back. At least that's the way I read these interviews. Random quotes:

I'd like to think it's made everybody more aware in a better way. But I think in some way, the paranoia hasn't helped.

and

On a personal level, I became actively engaged in conversations with my Muslim neighbors. ... Upon moving to southeast Michigan, my opportunities to work closely with Muslims have only increased due to the much larger Islamic presence in this area. Yes, I do believe that 9/11 has changed me dramatically, and ironically I believe that on a personal level, that has been for the better.

and

Since 9/11, life has been filled with more work and blessed moments to enlighten others on my faith and culture. Immediately post-9/11, I found myself overanxious, more cautious of where I went, how I traveled and the people I associated with. I felt I had to constantly defend my faith, culture and fellow Muslim brothers and sisters who were being persecuted for the actions of a rotten few.

and finally

9/11 stoked our country's best and worst sides. As a country, we mobilized with incredible speed and unity. We paid beautiful tribute to the people who lost their lives and sacrificed themselves to save lives. We lost our way through wars and still have not found the courage or means to articulate the strength of our country to ourselves and the world. Our religious hostility and fear continue toward the Muslim world. We have not convincingly articulated America's strength, goodness and promise. ... Our country began chasing demonic enemies, instead of leading ... with integrity and hope.

Either the reactions I read are kind of bizarre and twisted, or I'm the one who is nuts. For some reason, I keep thinking that we should not be accepting the words of our local imams. I've read opinion pieces by some of them in our various local news rags, and based on these writings and interviews in these same rags, I don't trust them.

But there was an editorial in today's Free Press defending the peacefulness of Islam (because that's what the Qu'ran is all about, we are told) that had a line that I do agree with:

We need more dialogue, more reading of the Quran, both inside the Muslim community and out.

Yes, we should all read the Qu'ran. My son bought a copy, but it was translated by a non-Muslim. I'm not sure how accurate it is. I'd like to find one of the ones that CAIR passed out a few years ago. I've been checking used book stores. I tried reading my son's but it is a tough slog. The narrative is kind of weak, and it seems to be full of non sequitors. I can't let that stop me though. Read, I must.

When it comes to this claim in the editorial though:

The Quran is filled with such verses calling on Muslims to practice every kind of goodness. Yet most Americans know little or nothing about them. An August Pew Research poll concluded that 35% of Americans believe Islam is more likely to encourage violence than other religions, while 24% weren’t sure.

Of course, it’s not difficult to understand why. Approaching the ninth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, we can’t forget the violence of that day. The really ugly truth: The 9/11 attackers, the Taliban and al-Qaeda are all doing far more harm to the Quran than Jones is by burning it. By distorting the verses of the Quran to justify their violent agenda, these terrorists and their sympathizers continue to breed hostility toward Islam and Muslims. Instead of spreading the Quran's message of peace, they are spreading their own message of hatred

I have to ask: how do you distort verses like:

Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

and

Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission.

and

So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).

and

When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah's Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.

and

The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.

and I could go on and on, or I can recommend Prophet of Doom for more quotes from the Qu'ran and other Islamic sources that the apologists, and the imams, and the spreaders of "dawah" don't talk about and don't want us to talk about. We are supposed to ignore a vast body of Islamic teaching that is not as savory as the tiny verses of love and honesty, that may have even been revoked according to the the Islamic concept of abrogation.

In an attempt to polish Islam's image, Muslim activists usually quote verses from the Quran that were written in the early days of the Islamic movement while Mohammed lived in Mecca. Those passages make Islam appear loving and harmless because they call for love, peace and patience. Such is a deception. The activists fail to tell gullible people that such verses, though still in the Quran, were nullified, abrogated, rendered void by later passages that incite killing, decapitations, maiming, terrorism and religious intolerance. The latter verses were penned while Mohammed’s headquarters was based in Medina.

When speaking with people of Christianized/Western societies, Muslim activists deliberately hide a major Islamic doctrine called "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (the Abrogator and the Abrogated). This simply means that in situations wherein verses contradict one another, the early verses are overridden by the latter verses. The chronological timing in which a verse was written determines its authority to establish policies within Islam. Non-Muslims cannot afford to be ignorant about the full implications of the Abrogator and the Abrogated Doctrine (al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh). When Islamic spokesmen say that Islam is a religion of peace and that the Quran does not support such things as human rights infractions, gender bias and terrorism, they are lying. This means that the Western politicians and liberal journalists, who continually spout that Islam is a noble religion of peace, are in reality propagating a deception that they have been deceived into parroting.

I'm sure they won't be discussing any of that today as the imams slide some more taqiyya past the gullible Christians and Jews, and these silly infidels won't care because they can engage in vast amounts of self-congratulation based on how tolerant, accepting, and enlightened they are. Rather than be part of that charade, I'll be thinking of those murdered in the 9/11 attacks and in all of the over 16,000 Islamic terror attacks since then.

I'm just not very enlightened.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, interfaith relations, islam, Koran, Muslims

posted by Harry @ 1:42 PM 3 comments

Fourth of July Thoughts

In today's Detroit Free Press, Stephen Henderson offered his views on the Fourth of July. Being an editor at the liberal Free Press, Henderson is no simple-minded cheerleader for America. Sure, we can celebrate, but we also have to acknowledge those less than savory episodes in our country's history.

But the Declaration's principal author, Thomas Jefferson, and its signers in the Continental Congress were clouded by a much more complex morality, principally hobbled by their inability to ensure that the independence they were asserting for themselves would apply to everyone.

and

There are, for example, our historic struggles with gender equality and the current debate over equal protection for gay Americans. You can see it in arguments over how we treat our enemies in the war on terror and how a nation of immigrants welcomes -- or shuns -- those who want to share in our freedom.

Of course, he's going somewhere with this. And it's his next sentence.

America is a journey toward perfection, defined by its struggles to overcome the frailty of human imperfection.

Perfection? Understanding that all we have to work with in this country, and on this planet, are imperfect, fallible human beings, the quest for perfection is strictly for suckers. I think we have to understand that first, and look at the other plans throughout history that sought perfection, but found instead slavery, fascism, and death.

I began rereading volume II (out of 3) of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (my summer reading project) and came across the following quote:

A people who still remembered that their ancestors had been the masters of the world would have applauded, with conscious pride, the representation of ancient freedom, if they had not long since been accustomed to prefer the solid assurance of bread to the unsubstantial visions of liberty and greatness.

And then there was this, by Nolan Finley in today's Detroit News:

Voters in Port Chester, N.Y., went to the polls last month carrying six votes each to cast in the village board election. They could spread them out among multiple candidates, or plunk them all for one favorite. They were also allowed to cast ballots over a five-day period.

The hope of federal Judge Stephen Robinson was that Hispanics, who make up nearly half the Port Chester populace, would target their six votes each at Hispanic candidates, thus achieving his goal of crafting a board more demographically in line with the local population.

Robinson ordered the scheme, called cumulative voting, under the federal Voting Rights Act, which has turned into one of the greatest perversions of democracy ever imagined. The judge acted on complaints that despite their large presence in the community, Hispanics had never managed to win a seat on the board.

There was no evidence that Hispanics were being kept from the polls or discouraged from voting. Nor was there anything stopping Hispanic citizens in the past from pooling their considerable single votes behind one Hispanic candidate. But the fact that a Hispanic hadn't been elected was evidence enough for the judge to determine racial discrimination was at work.

Even some Hispanic voters found the solution unnerving.

With that kind of voting, why do we need people to vote at all? Our wise progressive judges can let us know who the winners should be, and then votes can be appropriately divided so that the correct candidate wins. All candidates will receive at least some of the votes. Self-esteem of the candidates must also be a consideration . . . mustn't it?

Off to the barbecue!

Labels: Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, Fourth of July, Gibbon, Nolan Finley

posted by Harry @ 1:41 PM 0 comments

Yet More Educational Stupidity

Will the idiocy never end? How bad do things have to be before those in charge make the changes that must be made? Here is another fool offering her prescription for continued failure. She thinks she's advocating for the poor and downtrodden who have no chance at getting a decent education. If she knew anything about education, she would understand that she brings nothing useful to the discussion. She is another nonthinking dolt who thinks that the government can solve all of our problems for us if we only calm down and let it. Personal responsibility has no place in her world view. And of course, in her universe, charter schools are part of the problem with American education.

As we struggle to make universal health care a reality, we are dismantling the one national institution whose mission is generally applauded: the delivery of free public education for all of our children.

Lesson: if it's free, it must be good. In fact, it must be better. Why? Fool, because it's free. Never mind the fact that by any measure available, education is not being delivered to a large portion of our children by the "free" public schools. That should be especially and painfully obvious to anybody in and around Detroit. So one must wonder how anybody in the editorial department at the Detroit Free Press could take this basically anti-capitalist rant seriously.

The idea that essential social goals can be achieved by free market practices is a delusion.

And essential social goals are defined as exactly what in this woman's socialist world? So what is the gist of her complaint?

Charters are simply enabled to bleed students – and their accompanying dollars – from the public, universal system. Although charters must accept students on a first-come, first-served basis, they can limit enrollment numbers, thus leaving many out. Geoffrey Canada’s Harlem program is rightly honored, yet children are accepted by lottery. Many who wish to participate are left outside.

Equality! That is the gist of her problem. All students don't have equal outcomes. And there must be equal outcomes or the system isn't fair.

But as she tells it, every student can't escape public schools and get into the charter schools that do allow their students to excel. Her idea of equality isn't being met. She would rather have the current system-wide failure continue. That way, all students could be equal in their failure; equality of outcome. Her idea of equality is a Harrison Bergeron world. Hasn't that been the result of all societies that have used government mandates to meet "essential social goals?"

It would be beyond the mental capabilities of this woman to stretch her thinking to wonder if perhaps the methods being used by successful charter schools should be used in a greater number of schools so that more children could succeed. No, that would lean too far in the direction of free markets. And we know that it is the fault of free markets that the United States, and western civilization in general are such miserable failures when it comes to allowing people to have a free productive life. That's why so many flee to the government controlled utopias of Cuba, Zimbabwe, N. Korea, and other happy, thriving utopias where essential social goals are being achieved.

So tell me again, why are these idiots still being taken seriously?

Labels: charter schools, Detroit Free Press, education

posted by Harry @ 2:49 PM 1 comments

Animal Education

I know making assumptions is one of those practices that can make one look foolish, but I'm going to assume that the following letter from Thursday's Detroit Free Press is from someone who proudly refers to herself as an environmentalist.

I'm an old woman who strives to lessen the impact of my carbon footprint so my grandchildren and their children can flourish on a healthy Earth. I have little patience for those who whine about looking at a sunset through the wings of a windmill that's a mile or more distant.

I have seen the windmills in Pennsylvania and think they look majestic. They have an aura of power with grace. The concern that waterfront properties would drop in value is nonsense. People will always want waterfront property, and those who can afford it will buy it.

Michigan has nearly 1,000 miles of shoreline where clean wind energy is available. Why is it taking us so long to take advantage of this?

That windmills may be a danger to migratory birds is a concern, but birds will learn the dangers of flying near windmills and avoid them. Your recent article focused only on opposition to wind power ("Will Canada's wind turbine's invade lakes?" Feb. 26). Your coverage should be more balanced.

Earth will survive no matter what we do. What's at stake is the planet's ability to support human life.

I have no problem with a person thinking that windmills look majestic even though I think they are as attractive as a barbed wire fence. I don't care that she thinks property values won't go down. Maybe they won't if the entire Lake Michigan coastline is filled with them and there is no way to escape them if one wants property on Lake Michigan.

But, "birds will learn the dangers . . . and avoid them"? Under that line of reasoning, we no longer need the Endangered Species Act. If migratory birds can learn to avoid windmills, surely other animals can learn to avoid the human caused dangers that affect them. Whales can learn to dodge harpoons. Wolves can learn to avoid hunters and traps. Spotted owls can learn to nest in other trees. Migratory sea turtles can learn to lay their eggs on beaches that don't attract tourists.

In fact, rather than protect any animal species, can't we find animal trainers who will teach them to alter their behavior so that they aren't affected by human activities? I suggest this as the new mission of PETA, Greenpeace, and all of those other "save the earth" groups. Teach the animals new modes of behavior so that they on longer need protection.

And then start building nuclear power plants and allow drilling for oil in the United States. Windmills are still a bad idea.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, environment

posted by Harry @ 7:46 PM 3 comments

Ironic, Ain't It?

Yesterday, the Detroit Free Press ran this editorial decrying the latest Supreme Court decision, which essentially struck down McCain Feingold as unconstitutional. It is fearfully titled, "Government by the people, RIP."

Thursday's 5-4 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission gives corporations, labor unions and other wealthy agglomerations of narrow economic interest the green light to expand their already disproportionate influence over governmental policy in health care, nutrition, financial regulation and every other realm in which corporations stand to make a buck at the expense of the public interest.

Up until this Supreme Court decision, none of us had to worry about special interests influencing government policy. It just didn't happen. We were protected. But don't worry, the Free Press is calling on the government to save us, in spite of the Supreme Court, to save us.

But Congress must not abandon the fight to regulate corporate spending in candidate elections, and Michigan's congressional delegation and state legislators must push for tougher disclosure rules to assure that voters can at least observe the corrupting impact of corporate campaign cash in real time.

Yes, that's right folks, only Congress can protect us from corporate predators. And they will take care of our medical, energy, and financial needs . . . even though the only working experience most of these people have is in politics and government. They will get advice from smart people . . . who aren't considered special interests?

Today though, in this article, it seems there is a slightly different point of view to the effect of special interests in government.

Dozens of current and former corporate executives have a message for Congress: Quit hitting us up for campaign cash.

Roughly 40 executives from companies including Playboy Enterprises, ice cream maker Ben & Jerry’s, the Seagram’s liquor company, toymaker Hasbro, Delta Airlines and Men’s Wearhouse sent a letter to congressional leaders today urging them to approve public financing for House and Senate campaigns. They say they are tired of getting fund-raising calls from lawmakers — and fear it will get only worse after Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling.

and

Congressional candidates who find themselves attacked by a flood of special-interest TV ads in the 2010 elections will likely reach out to their party’s biggest donors for money to help them counter the blitz.

“Members of Congress already spend too much time raising money from large contributors,” the business executives’ letter says. “And often, many of us individually are on the receiving end of solicitation phone calls from members of Congress. With additional money flowing into the system due to the court’s decision, the fundraising pressure on members of Congress will only increase.”

So remind me, whose fault is again that deep-pocketed special interests are running roughshod over us regular Americans? Do members of Congress have some sort of disability that limits their ability to take responsibility for their actions and outrageous mistakes? Maybe Congress needs to pass laws protecting corporations from unscrupulous politicians.

Labels: Congress, Detroit Free Press, politics, special interests, Supreme Court

posted by Harry @ 3:30 PM 0 comments

Political Correctness Triumphs

Here in today's Detroit Free Press is a lengthy article on the failings of airport security. They do use the word "terrorist", but nowhere in the entire article are the words that should be in any article on protection against modern day terrorists. Yes, the words "muslim" and "Islam" are absent. But wait. If that weren't dumb enough,

But one risk is that in the rush to protect the flying public, vigilance could mean widespread profiling of race, age and gender, raising civil liberty questions.

and

"When it comes to safety, I am willing to do just about anything. You've got nuts going around," she said. "But profiling may get a little trickier. I have a family member with a common name, and he is a dark-complected African-American man. He is constantly getting stopped at the airport. They stopped him several times just going to Vegas. I have to remind him to just stay calm and answer the questions."

No, why bother profiling Muslims? After all, we're constantly told that terrorism is unIslamic. And we must believe that at the cost of creating new terrorists or something like that.

On the other hand, there is this article that demonstrates that even Democrats can sometimes learn new things.

Some Democratic lawmakers who support closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, say the U.S. should reconsider whether to repatriate suspected terrorists from Yemen, given the al-Qaida activity in the poor Arab nation.

But stupidity is a tough thing to beat.

Yemen has freed the six Yemenis who were released from Guantanamo Bay and returned to the country on Dec. 20, security officials and a lawyer for the men told the Associated Press.

The lawyer, Ahmed al-Arman, said the six were freed from Yemeni custody over the last week, with the last two freed Saturday night. They were handed over to their families.

Security officials held the six for questioning and investigation since their handover by the United States, but they found no evidence of involvement in terrorism or other crimes, Yemeni security officials said. The six gave guarantees that they would not leave the country, would not associate with terror groups and would report regularly to the police, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to reporters.

Sure, I believe them. Why would they lie?

Labels: Detroit Free Press, islam, Muslims, terrorism

posted by Harry @ 5:04 PM 3 comments

Save the Earth Somewhere Else

It seems that some people don't want wind turbines in their backyard, or in the waters by their homes. According to this article,

A proposal to construct a massive wind turbine farm, capable of producing 1,000 megawatts of power, over 100 square miles of Lake Michigan, a few miles offshore from Pentwater and Ludington, has many residents howling.

At a meeting in Ludington last week, residents gasped and jaws dropped when developers unveiled drawings showing 100 building-size turbines spinning within sight of Lake Michigan beaches.

"Would anyone put these in the Grand Canyon? This is our Grand Canyon, our beautiful spot," said Pentwater resident Mary Stiphany, adding that the hulking turbines would obstruct views and hurt tourism. "It would be such an eyesore."

The response is an indication that making the dream of alternative energy real in a spot as treasured as the Great Lakes may be harder than imagined. The plan also raises questions that have yet to be answered about offshore wind power in Michigan, such as where turbines belong, how leases would work and who would issue permits.

Satellite data show that some of the strongest winds in the country are offshore, including winds over the Great Lakes.

Personally, I wouldn't want all of those wind turbines in my neighborhood either. They're noisy and ugly and they take up a lot of room. Has anybody ever bothered doing an Environmental Impact Statement on these monsters? Way back many years ago in my college days, working for a local suburb, I had to go out and gather data on a city project to extend a sidewalk, so that an environmental impact statement could be prepared. But this 100 square mile, bird-killing eyesore gets a pass? Apparently we now ask no questions of the apparently green.

While I wouldn't want wind turbines in my backyard, I could easily coexist with a nuclear power plant. They take up much less room to put out the same amount of energy. They're much less of a blot on the landscape. They're much quieter. They don't kill birds. They don't put out any of that nasty carbon dioxide stuff, which by government decree has become a pollutant. And according to Yahoo Answers,

By comparison, the Fermi nuclear power plant near Monroe, Michigan sits on a site of about 2 square miles and produces 1,150 megawatts of electricity 24 hours a day for 18 months straight.

They reliably produce the energy we need to run a modern society. Yes, they produce waste. There will always be some kind of waste or downside to any method of energy production. I can't help thinking though, that most of the growing monetary cost to nuclear energy production and waste disposal is due more to political considerations rather than actual cost. Those brilliant scientific minds who have half of the population of the Earth afraid of climate change caused by that new pollutant, carbon dioxide, have also created a climate of fear when it comes to nuclear energy. If there is any scientific validity to that fear, I'd like to see it so that I too, can be among the enlightened.

When it comes to solar power,

At 5 acres of solar panels per megawatt, you need 5,000 acres of solar panels to equal 1,000 megawatts of electricity. Those solar panels only work at peak power levels during the sunny times, so, on average, they only put out about 25% of their rated capacity. That means you really need 20,000 acres of solar panels to generate 1,000 megwatts of electricity per hour, on average. 20,000 acres is 31.25 square miles.

And the greenies don't want solar panels (or wind farms) in their backyards either.

The New York Times reports on Sen. Dianne Feinstein's latest effort to spur block the development of clean, renewable energy facilities:

Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation in Congress on Monday to protect a million acres of the Mojave Desert in California by scuttling some 13 big solar plants and wind farms planned for the region.

But before the bill to create two new Mojave national monuments has even had its first hearing, the California Democrat has largely achieved her aim. Regardless of the legislation’s fate, her opposition means that few if any power plants are likely to be built in the monument area, a complication in California’s effort to achieve its aggressive goals for renewable energy.

So where is the energy to power our country supposed to come from? Maybe The Professor has the answer. Washington and the greenies sure don't.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, environment, hypocrisy

posted by Harry @ 6:43 PM 2 comments

Poverty in Uganda

I first read this article in the Detroit Free Press. It annoyed me at its simplistic and biased premise. Then it showed up on Little Green Footballs. And it bothered me more. I'm not going to jump on the "let's trash LGF" bandwagon, but for somebody who seems to pride himself on getting all of the information before entering into a fray, this post seems more of a knee jerk by Charles Johnson.

At age 45, after giving birth to 13 children in her village of thatch roofs and bare feet, Beatrice Adongo made a discovery that startled her: birth control.

"I delivered all these children because I didn't know there was another way," said Adongo, who started on a free quarterly contraceptive injection last year. Surrounded by her weary-faced brood, her 21-month-old boy clutching at her faded blue dress, she added glumly: "I fear we are already too many in this family."

On a continent where fewer than one in five married women use modern contraception, an explosion of unplanned pregnancies is threatening to bury Adongo's family and a generation of Africans under a mountain of poverty.

Promoting birth control in Africa faces a host of obstacles — patriarchal customs, religious taboos, ill-equipped public health systems — but experts also blame a powerful, more distant force: the U.S. government.

Under President George W. Bush , the United States withdrew from its decades-long role as a global leader in supporting family planning, driven by a conservative ideology that favored abstinence and shied away from providing contraceptive devices in developing countries, even to married women.

As I recall from just being alive for the past 50 or so years, Uganda has had other problems that have been much larger than a lack of contraception. Remember Idi Amin?

Idi Amin Dada, who became known as the 'Butcher of Uganda' for his brutal, despotic rule whilst president of Uganda in the 1970s, is possibly the most notorious of all Africa's post-independence dictators. Amin seized power in a military coup in 1971 and ruled over Uganda for 8 years. Estimates for the number of his opponents who were either killed, tortured, or imprisoned vary from 100,000 to half a million. He was ousted in 1979 by Ugandan nationalists, after which he fled into exile.

That's got to slow down a society's rise no matter how many children women are having. They got rid of him, but as always on the African continent, more troubles followed. Today, Uganda faces The Lord's Resistance Army, as twisted a group of primitive barbarian thugs as I've ever read about.

The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) , led by Joseph Kony, operated in the north from bases in southern Sudan. The LRA committed numerous abuses and atrocities, including the abduction, rape, maiming, and killing of civilians, including children. In addition to destabilising northern Uganda from bases in Sudan, the LRA congregated in the Bunia area in eastern Congo. They linked up with the Army for the Liberation of Rwanda (ALIR) and other rebel groups battling with forces from the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD)

Then there is the AIDS problem and the lack of tourism. Frankly, I'd want to know that I'd be safe from marauding bands of the LRA before I went to visit Uganda. And increased access to contraception will to what to slow down the spread of AIDS? Does the spread of AIDS have any effect on the economy? I'm guessing "yes."

To believe that poverty in Uganda is being caused by lack of birth control is naive. To present it as a news story in order to promote a "green" agenda and take another whack at the Bush Administration is dishonest. Treating the Ugandan population as pawns in this green Bush trashing article is criminal. How does this help Uganda rise out of poverty? It doesn't. In order to raise their standard of living, Ugandans would have to increase their "carbon footprint", and among Greenies that is a mortal sin. Better they should remain poor but have fewer children. That means fewer tiny poverty stricken carbon emitters, and the Greenies can pat themselves on the back for reducing the number of Ugandan poor.

As a final question, once contraception is available to Ugandan women, what will the excuse for Ugandan poverty be in a generation when women only have a child or two? Or will the greenies even care any more?

Labels: birth control, Detroit Free Press, environment, George Bush, Little Green Footballs, poverty, Uganda

posted by Harry @ 8:13 PM 4 comments

But It's For Our Own Good

Let's see. In a few years we won't be allowed to use incandescent light bulbs. If we don't have health insurance we can face fines and possible jail time. We shouldn't use oil from Islamic nations, but we aren't allowed to drill our own or build nuclear power plants to power the future battery powered automobiles, which I'm sure we will be "encouraged" to buy in order to "save the planet." Muslims who promote and engage in Jihad are the victims and the people that they murder are - um - are - the oppressors? And that's not just in Israel any more. Local Detroit papers went on for days with articles about how the local Muslim community was afraid of that backlash that we've been warned about since September 12, 2001, you know, due to the latest unfortunate incident where a Muslim is stricken with Sudden Jihad Syndrome, this time at Ft. Hood, where a Muslim major went on a short shooting spree that had nothing to do with the fact that he's Muslim - and well, I'm sure everyone has read about all of those politically incorrect red flags that were ignored, since had anyone in authority taken action, they would have been roundly attacked by CAIR and their fellow traveling diversity mongers. And yes, many fellow citizens have allowed themselves to be convinced that this had nothing to do with Islam.

And then there's this piece by Mark Steyn about how we're poised to loose even more of our formerly Constitutionally protected, but granted by our Creator, rights.

I’m always appreciative when a fellow says what he really means. Tim Flannery, the jet-setting doomsaying global warm-monger from down under, was in Ottawa the other day promoting his latest eco-tract, and offered a few thoughts on “Copenhagen”—which is transnational-speak for December’s UN Convention on Climate Change. “We all too often mistake the nature of those negotiations in Copenhagen,” remarked professor Flannery. “We think of them as being concerned with some sort of environmental treaty. That is far from the case. The negotiations now ongoing toward the Copenhagen agreement are in effect diplomacy at the most profound global level. They deal with every aspect of our life and they will influence every aspect of our life, our economy, our society.”

Hold that thought: “They deal with every aspect of our life.” Did you know every aspect of your life was being negotiated at Copenhagen? But in a good way! So no need to worry. After all, we all care about the environment, don’t we? So we ought to do something about it, right? And, since “the environment” isn’t just in your town or county but spreads across the entire planet, we can only really do something at the planetary level. But what to do? According to paragraph 38 on page 18 of the latest negotiating text, the convention will set up a “government” to manage the “new funds” and the “related facilitative processes.”

The whole thing is worth reading because one, it's by Mark Steyn, and two, we need to pay attention to what these "selfless" environmentalists have in store for the rest of us.

As our rights are slowly eaten away, it appears that it is with the blessings of a large portion of our fellow American citizens. Of the 53% of the voters who elected our current president, there are many who did not know his real agenda. Some of them foolishly depended on the Obama-loving, Bush-hating MSM for their information. Others were just stupid. But a lot of folks agree wholeheartedly with the Obama agenda. For example, there was this letter in today's Detroit Free Press.

Thanks for the comprehensive coverage of Michigan tax needs and present income statistics.

You report, "The top 5% of households in Michigan now have as much or more income than the bottom half." Anyone who reads this and does not support a graduated income tax either didn't graduate from the 7th grade, or did graduate from Harvard Business School and is now one of the millionaires or billionaires protecting their incomes in that 5% bracket.

It's not hard to guess who is fighting the graduated income tax movement, and who is funding it.

Most of your readers are too young to remember the days when our country and leaders believed in a sane and fair distribution of wealth in this country.

In the '50s, we had an excess profits tax where companies had to pay their excess profits in taxes or give the money to their employees in bonuses. Blue-collar workers received healthy bonuses every quarter at the company where I worked.

Excess profits? How much is excess? And what will this writer say when some bureaucrat decides that he has to part with more of his excess income? I bet this is a person who decries "obscene" profits too . . . as opposed to merely erotic profits, or "artistic" or . . . you get the idea. Too many people today find freedom an irksome burden and are looking for scapegoats for their problems. Obama and the Democratic Congress are helping out with lists of the most popular, you know, Fox News, Big Pharma, Wall Street, the Insurance Industry.

But remember - Obama and his cronies, and environmentalists, and the diversity lobby, and the Islamic community have your best interests at heart. They know what's better for you much better than you do. After all, they're intellectuals.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, economy, environment, islam, Mark Steyn, MSM, Obama, Obamacare

posted by Harry @ 5:31 PM 1 comments

Is This Really Rational Thought?

OK, I disagree with the premise. That doesn't make the editorial writer stupid. But for the Free Press to run thinking this sloppy, I just have to wonder how the writer and the editor make a living in their jobs. The article begins,

Anyone who still can't understand why health care reform should be the government's business need look no further than the pharmaceutical industry, which is raising its prices at the fastest rate in years despite an economic downturn that has pushed most consumer prices lower.

It ends,

What federal lawmakers should take away from this is the necessity of giving the government broad authority to negotiate drug prices for Medicare and Medicaid recipients, just as large private insurers do. Economists are divided over how effective such reforms will be at reining in prices, but as current price trends show, what consumers pay for prescriptions is too important a cost driver to be left entirely to the private market.

But inbetween these two paragraphs, it is written,

Pharmaceutical industry spokesmen cite the need to maximize profits on popular drugs whose patent protection is about to expire. But most outsiders believe drug makers are anticipating government regulations that may limit their ability to raise prices in the near future. Economists recall a similar spike in 2006, just before Congress agreed to subsidize prescriptions for tens of millions of Medicare recipients.

So, according to this editorial, pharmaceutical companies are raising their prices in response to predicted government policies, which are going to interfere with their abilities to price their products as they see fit. That is neither your mother's nor Adam Smith's private market. What the Free Press is calling for is more government interference to solve problems created by previous government interference in the marketplace. But somehow, the government jumping in and distorting the market to the point that people can't afford their medicine is the fault of the "private market." That's a cycle (and a tactic to increase demands for more government) as old as governments. The problem is that we are taught to forget or ignore previous government episodes of big government screwing up the market in order to make us accept the next round of interference, which, with past experience as our guide, will only lead to more problems.

With the pharmaceutical industries one of the scapegoats du-jour, I suppose we can expect to see more "hard hitting" editorials exposing them for daring to make a profit in these times of economic turbulence . . . caused by whom? Oh yeah, a government that is out to solve all of our problems - at the cost of - greater and more numerous problems.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, economics, government, Universal Health Care

posted by Harry @ 8:16 PM 1 comments

Obama's Nobel Prize and Islam

First of all, there have been worse choices for the Nobel Peace Prize. A certain keffiyeh-sporting Palestinian terrorist comes to mind. And then there's Jimmy Carter. And no, I'm not comparing Obama to Yassir Arafat. I'm paying him a (very) back-handed compliment. I actually wasn't going to comment at all. But then I read this article in the Detroit Free Press, and I couldn't keep my keyboard quiet. In fact, I wanted to start screaming at my newspaper.

Muslims around metro Detroit who have witnessed President Barack Obama's outreach efforts applauded the announcement of his Nobel Peace Prize on Friday.

I believe what Obama is doing with the Muslim world is pandering. I'm sure it's insane and it will bring no good to our country. Remember, Bush too, stupidly reached out to the Muslim world. And what did he get in return? The same thing Obama will get, complaints that he isn't doing enough to pander to - uh - I mean reach out to Muslims.

"Obama has made a point to reach out to the Muslim world," said Tarek Baydoun, 25, of Dearborn. "It serves America to have someone so in touch with the faith of over a billion people around the world."

One of the reasons given by the Nobel committee for awarding Obama was his overtures to the Muslim world -- an effort repeatedly seen this year in metro Detroit.

Several department heads in the Obama administration have met with Muslims and Arab Americans in Dearborn, most recently U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, who spoke Wednesday at the Lebanese American Heritage Club in Dearborn.

And last month, CIA Director Leon Panetta met with Muslims and Arab Americans in Dearborn for a Ramadan dinner. Panetta and Locke said in their talks that Muslims and Arab Americans are vital parts of the United States.

The outreach to Dearborn is part of an effort by Obama that he laid out in a speech he gave to Muslims in June in Cairo, Egypt, in which he called for a "new beginning between the United States and Muslims."

The Commerce Department cited that speech in explaining why Locke visited Dearborn this week.

And what kind of new beginning can we expect? One where Muslims give us the same respect that they expect to receive from us infidels? Don't count on it. Will there be fewer terrorist plots? Fewer demands that we abandon Israel to the tender mercies of the surrounding terrorists states to prove that Obama really wants to force the United States to submit to the status of dhimmi? Sorry, Barack. Some of us will not submit.

"The outreach to the Muslim world was long warranted," said Victor Begg of Bloomfield Hills, who attended the Dearborn dinner with Panetta and heads the Council of Islamic Organizations of Michigan.

See? Mr. Begg has forgotten all about Bush, the previous panderer-in-chief. Since only power and brute force are respected in the Muslim world, Bush, who in the American tradition of consensual government, stepped down from the presidency when his term was up, is of concern to the Muslim world no longer. There is a new dhimmi in town, and his name is Obama.

Richard Nodel, president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Metropolitan Detroit, said Friday in a statement that he was pleased that Obama said in his remarks after winning the prize that he has an "unwavering commitment ... to the rights of all Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security in nations of their own."

I have one question for Richard Nodel: Are you stupid?

What is it with these Jews who still worship Obama? They don't seem to understand that Israelis and Palestinians have had numerous chances to live in peace and security, but the Palestinians refuse to implement that peace. Haven't they noticed that whenever peace gets too near, they begin an intifada? Or an all out war? Palestinians have been refusing to live in peace with Jews since the 1920s. Will Richard Nodel join Obama in his condemnation of Israelis building homes for Jews in Israel's capital city, Jerusalem, while at the same time ignoring or excusing the violence perpetrated by the Palestinians? If so, he won't be the first Jew to do so.

So maybe what it comes down to is that: Bush didn't get it. Obama doesn't get it. 78% of the Jewish community doesn't get it. The Muslim community gets it. And we will get it in the end . . . from the Muslim community.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, Dumb Jews, islam, Israel, Nobel Prize, Obama, Palestinians

posted by Harry @ 5:32 PM 10 comments

Is Health Care a Right?

I don't think health care is a right, but others disagree.

Strolling along the route of the Woodward Dream Cruise last weekend, my friend Aaron noticed a trio of well-fed spectators wedged into identical lawn chairs on the public right-of-way. None of the middle-aged men in this comical triptych wore a shirt. Each held a beer in one hand and a cigarette in the other, and all three sported pendulous bellies that spilled over their beltlines and glistened in the midday sun.

"There," Aaron observed ruefully, "are the guys whose health care we're about to be on the hook for."

But then, in the name of "equal health care for all" he goes on to shill for Obamacare. But under his thinking, he has to be concerned for the three hefty gentlemen. He has to worry that they're going to take more of their "fair share" of health care. But then again, if health care is a right, don't certain responsibilities go along with it? Like maintaining healthy habits?

Since not everyone will exercise and eat all of their vegetables, won't there have to be some sort of monitoring system in place? Will we be required to report any fishy slovenly health habits we see amongst our neighbors? As he states at the end,

My own conviction is that everyone ought to enjoy access to some minimum level of preventive and acute care, but that reimbursement for the cost of treating many chronic health problems should depend, at least to some extent, on what steps the patient has taken to avoid them. Just as people who commit felonies forfeit their right to vote, those who make no effort to limit their own risk factors diminish their moral claim on medical treatment.

So long as we continue to ration health care -- as any service whose supply is limited is forever destined to be rationed by someone's criteria, whether that someone draws a paycheck from the federal government or Aetna -- what we've done to keep ourselves healthy ought to be at least one of the factors considered.

After all, those three guys watching the Dream Cruise had to get up early to secure their curbside seats. Shouldn't they have to display at least that much self-discipline to secure the world's most expensive health care?

Rationing is OK with him. The good and moral people who go to the gym and eschew desert are entitled what will become increasingly scarce medical care. Those who want to take advantage of the system by smoking, drinking, and gorging themselves on pizza, ice cream, and greasy burgers can pay for their own angioplasties and heart valve replacements, their adult onset diabetes, lung cancer, and cirrhosis of the liver. They won't deserve hip and knee replacements due to their morbid obesity, which caused those joints to wear out before their time.

Surely this calls for an entirely new bureaucracy.

Also in today's Free Press was this article.

Hospitals in border cities, including Detroit, are forging lucrative arrangements with Canadian health agencies to provide care not widely available across the border.

Agreements between Detroit hospitals and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care for heart, imaging tests, bariatric and other services provide access to some services not immediately available in the province, said ministry spokesman David Jensen.

The agreements show how a country with a national care system -- a proposal not part of the health care changes under discussion in Congress -- copes with demand for care with U.S. partnerships, rather than building new facilities.

So if we get Obamacare shoved down our throats, where do we go when health care gets rationed to the point that it is in Canada? I'm in pretty good shape, but will I be denied certain care, or shoved to the end of the line if my neighbor reports that I took my family to Dairy Queen and I ended up enjoying a hot fudge sundae?

For more to think about, this link, which I found at Debbie Schlussel, shows the wait time for various procedures in the Canadian province of Ontario. It's at the website of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care. Check out some of those wait times. It's pretty sobering. That could come to the USA under Obamacare. And to add insult to injury, we'll go broke as a country to pay for it.

For real reform, how about forcing the government to stay out of health care and insurance altogether and letting the market take its course? I believe that you have a right to what you earn. And you can spend what you earn in what ever legal way you wish. You also have the responsibility to use your resources wisely because I might not have enough to share with you if you squander what you have and then need cash for medical expenses that would have been covered by insurance, had you bought insurance instead of the flat screen TV, surround sound, video games, and a new room to put it all in.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, Obamacare, Universal Health Care

posted by Harry @ 8:30 PM 1 comments

Things I had to Respond to

There were a few articles in today's Free Press that commanded my attention. Usually it's the ridiculous that draws me in and makes the bile rise, but there were some good things too.

First the dumb stuff:

Why is Congress still out to apologize for slavery?

Lawmakers are learning the hard way that trying to apologize for historic injustices isn't as easy as saying sorry.
Advertisement

Two weeks ago, the Senate passed a resolution calling on the country to apologize formally for more than three centuries of enslavement and segregation of African Americans. Senators thought they had done the right thing.

The feel-good moment was short-lived, however, after several members of the Congressional Black Caucus vowed to fight the measure when it reached the House of Representatives.

They object because it contains a disclaimer saying that the resolution can't be used to support legal claims against the United States by those seeking reparations or cash compensation for the suffering endured by black people.

No apology will ever be enough for some. They will always demand more. We know that. The smartest course in this case is to give them nothing. Encourage them to shut up already. At one time slavery was universal in human society. It was western civilization that fought to end it. The United States fought a war against slavery.

"It opens up a discussion, an opportunity for Americans to start a healing process,"

No it doesn't, it wastes time and energy. It creates demands for something that nobody living today is entitled to. I teach elementary school. Most of my students are black. Until they get to my class and I fill them in on the facts of the history of world-wide slavery, they think that slavery was a uniquely American institution. If our nation hasn't been healed yet, it's due to dopes who insist on continuing the focus on American slavery and its alleged continuing effect on Black Americans. If you read Thomas Sowell though, you can better understand that the current pathologies in the Black community have little to do with the legacy of slavery and everything to do with the breakdown of the family and the insistence on living a self-destructive culture. And why should I pay reparations? While blacks in the south were being used as slaves, my ancestors were being raped and murdered by Cossacks. Obviously, I never met these people, but still - can I have reparations? Since my ancestors suffered, don't I deserve them?

When it comes to political art, it always seems to me to be more politics than art. And the politics expressed are predictably on the left side of the aisle. If that's where your sympathies lie, you can introduce your article with sentences like,

Knit one, purl two. Fight the power.

Lisa Anne Auerbach knits charged political works stitched with slyly provocative slogans. They can be amusing, angry, quirky. One sweater says "My Jewish Grandma is Voting for Obama. Is Yours?" The back says "Chosen People Choose Obama." Another sweater says "When there's nothing left to burn, you have to set yourself on fire." Her "Body Count Mittens" are adorned with casualty figures from Iraq.

Oy vey, another liberal Jew, who, if she were as politically astute as she thinks she is, would never have voted for or supported Obama. And since Obama is the president, what power is she fighting?

For a much better understanding of Obama, Jews, and Israel, read this important piece by Melanie Phillips. (I found it at American Digest.) She gets it. I thought Dershowitz did. It's sad how politics can blind one to reality.

Here is an interesting letter to the Free Press clearly and simply demonstrating the unbreakable (especially when it comes to political solutions) Law of Unintended Consequences:

News of the cash-for-clunkers program is greatly distressing. I am a low-income, single mother with two teenage daughters. One is 17 and is saving up for her first vehicle. She will not be permitted to get her license until she can afford the car. The other is 15 and chomping at the bit already, eager for the independence she will achieve with her own ride.

More than once I have purchased what is being called a "clunker" because it is in the price range I can afford -- both the purchase price and the insurance costs without collision coverage. Several times I have purchased cars whose owners have told me they were asking the price because it was what they could get on a trade-in. What am I to do now that the incentive will be $4,500 for a trade-in on a car that may have been traded in for $1,000 in the past? I can't afford $4,500 for a vehicle.

What you might consider a clunker, I consider affordable transportation.

How many millions of other working poor will be financially slammed by our current one party ruling bodies?

Finally, here is a test. How much do you know about the founding principles of our nation? Just for the record, I scored 8 out of 10.

Labels: American Digest, art, Cash for Clunkers, Detroit Free Press, Jews, Obama, reparations, Thomas Sowell, United States

posted by Harry @ 3:46 PM 5 comments

A Daily Dose of Stupid

I found some really stupid things written in the Detroit Free Press this morning. At least I thought they were stupid. The writers of these pieces would obviously disagree with me. And it has come to the point for many people, that any idea they disagree with is an exercise in stupidity. That is a foolish way to think. You've got to have the facts or at least a decent argument to back up your thoughts. I may or may not have either.

The first selection is this article, reprinted in its entirety.

The American Civil Liberties Union released a report Tuesday that said the U.S. government's crackdown on terrorism financing has hampered the religious freedom of American Muslims by making it difficult for them to donate to Islamic charities.

Called "Blocking Faith, Freezing Charity," the 166-page report is based on 120 interviews with Muslim donors and leaders.

The report said that nine American Muslim charities, including the Dearborn-based Goodwill Charitable Organization, have been shut down since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as a result of government action during the Bush administration.

Muslims can still give to charities. There are many worthwhile charities who cater to people of all religions. If we infidels are constantly expected to reach out to the Muslims in our midst, shouldn't they at least make a minor gesture back? You know, send a few dollars to Goodwill, or the Salvation Army, or any of the hundreds of other charities in this country. If they wish to contribute to Islamic charities, shouldn't there be some sort of monitoring of these charities to make sure none of their zakat goes to jihad? Or have I committed an islamophobic thought crime by wondering if Islamic charities support jihadist murderers merely because there is a documented history of this support?

Next, we have a letter written to the Free Press,

Former Gov. William Milliken was being characteristcally modest in his Sunday column ("Make Michigan nation's clean energy powerhouse"), because history shows he was a leader before his time when it comes to renewable energy. Had the federal government supported his efforts back in 1976 to promote solar and wind energy in Michigan, we would now be at the head of the curve instead of catching up to it.

Having been a renewable energy advocate back in the 1970s, I saw a great burst of promise regarding our state's energy independence when Gov. Milliken signed Michigan's renewable energy tax credit into law. As a result, some 300 startup companies in solar and wind energy-related businesses were born in our state. That was 1976!

One or two years after the 1976 bill signing, the startup companies died on the vine because of a lack of will by the feds to support ongoing energy conservation tax credits. I pray that we are not going down that same road again.

No, these energy companies didn't die to to government inaction, they died due to consumer inaction. We, the American consumers, weren't interested. If these renewable energy concepts were as great as claimed, there would be no need for the government to shove them down our throats they way they are doing now. There would be no need for the never-ending "green" propaganda campaigns in our schools and media. People would buy them on their own because they would see an advantage to them beyond moral posturing. Unless, of course, we are too dumb to know what is good for us and we need the government to act as a benign guide and caretaker.

And speaking of government as caretaker, nursemaid, mommy, and daddy, here's another delightful letter.

Big banks that still have billions of dollars of uncollectable debt on their books want to repay the government the TARP funds. I wonder if the only reason they wish to repay is to get away from government control in regard to the excessive compensation in the form of stock options, pay and bonuses for top executives and boards of directors?

Well, wouldn't you? Or should executive pay be decided by the government? Some people would say yes to that, under the delusion that their pay will never be government approved. It's only the rich who have to be controlled by kindly Uncle Sam, not we, the people, right?

Oh, and by the way, Obama killed a fly today. It was quite an event. It was too late to be reported in today's Free Press. It still made me wonder if this was serious reporting. Vanderleun, at American Digest has written the post I was thinking of writing about this major event. Of course, he's written it much better than I would have, so we can all be thankful that I read his before attempting my own.

Labels: American Digest, Detroit Free Press, economics, energy, islam, Obama

posted by Harry @ 7:05 PM 0 comments

Writing About not Writing - sort of

I don't post much during the school year. I've got too much work to do. I do write letters though, lots of them - to newspapers - mostly my two hometown rags, The Detroit News and the Detroit Free Press. The News is the more conservative of the two, but they run the same biased-against-Israel type articles that the Free Press does. And they give space to Hezbollah supporting Imam Mohammed Ali Elahi. The only place their conservatism shows is when editor, Nolan Finley writes the occasional piece demanding that Palestinians take responsibility for the violence they promote.

Over the past two days I wrote four letters. And since they're for publication (happens about 10% of the time) I work a lot harder polishing than I do on blog posts. Some nights I'm up way past my bedtime to finish a letter or two. I don't want to be up on these nights. It makes my head hurt. But I know that I must write or the rising bile will never go down, and it will eat away at me until I write. I will be angry the next day if I don't get the letter out before I go to bed. It will be what I think about all day. I will be angry and I might take it out on my students. From what I understand about teaching, that is a bad thing. The headache disappears as soon as I hit the "send" key.

Obama made his speech to the Muslim world. My local papers ran stories, editorial, and analyses. They were exactly what I expected. Write, I must. And I did. And now I'm tired. So I am sitting around reading for most of today even though it is a beautiful day for being outside and working in the yard (and if saw my yard, you would agree that I really should be out there working).

I got it all out though, and I think I did it in an intelligent, well-reasoned manner. Sometimes when I write, I have to remove the anger and sarcasm, but I didn't have a problem this time. Maybe it was because I knew in advance that I was going to have to write.

And now Obama made his D-Day speech. I could have watched it or read a transcript. I don't want to. I know it will be praised by liberal progressives, and actually analyzed and critiqued by conservatives. I don't think Mr. Obama has any respect for our military or understands the role of the military in keeping us free and safe from attack by our enemies. Had Obama led the Spartans, he would have marched 300 negotiators to meet the Persians. After Pearl Harbor, he would have gone to Tokyo to let the Japanese know that we were not at war with them, and apologize for the American arrogance and anti-Japanese policies that made them angry at the United States in the first place. He would have taken an "even-handed" approach to the Holocaust.

So rather than write any more about Obama and his speech, I'm going to steal a bit from Vanderleun,

Today your job is straightforward. First you must load 40 to 50 pounds on your back. Then you need to climb down a net of rope that is banging on the steel side of a ship and jump into a steel rectangle bobbing on the surface of the ocean below you. Others are already inside the steel boat shouting and urging you to hurry up.

Once in the boat you stand with hundreds of others as the boat is driven towards distant beaches and cliffs through a hot hailstorm of bullets and explosions. Boats moving nearby are, from time to time, hit with a high explosive shell and disintegrate in a red rain of bullets and body parts. The smell of men fouling themselves near you as the fear bites into their necks and they hunch lower into the boat mingles with the smell of cordite and seaweed.

And here is Ramirez,

Labels: American Digest, D-Day, Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, Israel, Michael Ramirez, Obama

posted by Harry @ 7:33 PM 1 comments

When Critical Thinking Skills are Allowed to Evaporate

The Detroit Free Press no longer questions the government. Now that The Obama is firmly ensconced in the White House with family and dog, any pronouncements that come from Washington D.C. contain nothing but the truth, even when he tries to rule by royal fiat. Regarding the new auto emissions mandate from the Obama administration for example,

But the sweeping deal announced Tuesday on auto emission and mileage standards does indeed appear to be good for just about everybody -- assuming the vehicles it spawns are appealing to consumers.

OK, so there is one caveat. However,

The requirements will add an estimated $1,300 to the cost of vehicles, but the government says that will be offset by savings in gasoline.

The government says? Wasn't it the job of newspapers, once long ago in the fading mists of time, to question what the government says? Especially now that they are telling the auto companies how to make cars and will soon be telling the consumer what to buy? Can I see the congressional engineering degrees? Can I see the grease under Obama's fingernails from endless hours working on the engine of his SUV? Or was it removed during his last manicure?

The upside for the nation is cleaner air, which could lead to lower health care costs, and less dependence on oil. At a time when this country is using 20 million barrels of oil a day, Obama said that the plan will yield a savings of 1.8 billion barrels by 2016, or about what America imported last year from Saudi Arabia, Libya, Venezuela and Nigeria combined.

Get that? Obama said. Yes, that Obama. And he says . . . so it must be true! It's Obama. If Obama mandates that all cars and trucks in the U.S. run on unicorn farts by 2017, the Free Press would fawn over that too. And this is a Detroit paper. Detroit and automobiles used to go together like lox and bagels. Now the auto industry has been replaced in the hearts of Free Press editors, by their one true love, Obama.

Meanwhile, there are places where clear and critical thinking is still the order of the day, where the official word of the government, even if it is the Obama government, is questioned. The editors at National Review Online understand what is passing over the heads of the sycophantic idiots at the Free Press.

Obama’s hard sell — “This is a winning proposition for folks looking to buy a car” — is premised on some sketchy math. For one thing, experts outside the administration say the added per-vehicle cost could go as high as $8,000. You can’t save money getting more miles to the gallon if you can’t afford the car in the first place. For another, those estimated savings are based on the administration’s ability to predict gas prices seven to ten years into the future. If gas is still as cheap as it is now, savings on better mileage could be minimal.

Even if gas prices go up, the savings Obama predicts might not materialize. Cars that are more fuel efficient are cheaper to drive, increasing the likelihood that people will drive more. That wouldn’t just offset the savings — it would also offset promised reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions and oil imports, to say nothing of adding to congestion.

There's more of course, but it's based on facts that the Free Press is willing to ignore in deference to the one they will not question.

And if Obama and his environmentalist pals had their way, this is what we'd all be driving.

Labels: auto industry, Detroit, Detroit Free Press, environment, National Review, Obama

posted by Harry @ 8:30 PM 4 comments

Thoughts on Cuba and Other Stuff

Yes, I'm really too busy to blog, and this is not the post I was going to post. But when I'm too busy go toss off thoughts at an unsuspecting (and uncaring)Blogosphere, I use other people's thoughts. First, here are some thoughts on Cuba from Nat Hentoff, and them some that are more succinct from Michael Ramirez. I love the way he can portray such strong emotion in just two hands. The man can draw!

New Pulitzer prize-winning columnist Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, who has made 10 reporting trips to Cuba, writes (April 14) that the Congressional Black Caucus delegation was either naive or disingenuous "not to notice ... or acknowledge that Cuba is hardly the paradise of racial harmony and equality it pretends to be."


If these Black Caucus members — so lauded by Fidel for being accompanied by King's "aura" — had asked him and Raul for permission to look around Cuba on their own, they would have


heard considerable evidence from Afro-Cubans about their lower status in Michael Moore's paradise. However, adds Eugene Robinson, "maybe they were too busy looking into Fidel's eyes."

And I was going to comment on the fact that Earth Day is on Lenin's birthday. But that's been taken care of at People's Cube.

Meanwhile, at the Free Press, there are the usual calls for more government intervention to "help the poor".

Personal finances are not traditionally the purview of public officials. But in these tough times, government certainly has an interest in helping constituents protect their assets and create financially stable households. The life savings of many New Orleans residents were washed away during Hurricane Katrina. In some cities, a cash economy has become a public safety problem, with people becoming "walking ATMs" on days when pay or government checks are issued.

That's why the National League of Cities and the Cities for Financial Empowerment Coalition are working with many of their members, including Detroit, to ensure that consumers are financially literate and that banks offer deposit, payment, credit and electronic products that meet the needs of the unbanked. The league's "Bank on Cities" campaign includes education and outreach efforts that partner with local banks.

Thomas Sowell sees through the sloppy thinking of the Free Press and everyone else who wants more government intervention in order to force check cashing offices out of business while also forcing banks to give loans to people whether or not they can pay them back.

Words are not the only things that enable political rhetoric to magically transform reality. Numbers can be used just as creatively — and many voters are even more gullible about statistics than they are about words, apparently because statistics seem more objective.

The latest congressional crusade is to clamp down on small finance companies that provide “payday loans” and check-cashing services in many low-income neighborhoods, where there are few banks.

A common practice in making small loans of a few hundred dollars for a few weeks is to charge about $15 per hundred dollars lent. Politicians, the media, community activists, and miscellaneous other busybodies are able to transform these numbers into annual percentage charges of several hundred percent, thereby creating moral melodramas and demands that the government “do something” about such “abuses.”

Of course, these loans are seldom borrowed for a year. They are often loans for a couple of weeks or less, to meet some difficulty of the moment, suffered by people who live from payday to payday, whether they are being paid by a job or are receiving checks from Social Security, unemployment compensation, or welfare.

The alternative to getting a payday loan may be having the electricity cut off or not having money to buy some medication. It is worse to borrow from illegal loan sharks, who have their own methods of collecting.

While $15 per hundred dollars may sound like a high rate of interest, it is not all interest. The finance company incurs costs just to process a loan, and these costs are a higher proportion of the total cost for a small loan than for a large loan.

When Oregon imposed a limit of 36 percent annual interest on what a finance company could charge, that meant charging less than $1.50 for a $100 loan for a couple of weeks. A dollar and a half would probably not even cover the cost of processing the loan, much less the risks of default.

Not surprisingly, most of the small finance companies making payday loans in Oregon went out of business. But there are no statistics on how many low-income people turned to loan sharks, or had their electricity cut off, or had to do without their medicine.

This is just one of the many ways in which self-righteous busybodies leave havoc in their wake while going away feeling noble.

Labels: Cuba, Detroit Free Press, economics, Michael Ramirez, Nat Hentoff, The People's Cube, Thomas Sowell

posted by Harry @ 6:16 PM 0 comments

There is the current world-wide recession to consider. Then, if like me, you live in Michigan, you also have to deal with the fact that this state has been on the skids for years. As the auto companies slowly die, Michigan slowly fades. But what if you live in that part of Michigan known as Detroit, you know, the Motor City, Motown, home of what used to be known as "the Big 3", Ford, Chrysler, and GM? Then you really know what failure is.

I've been a Detroit area resident all of my life. (No, I'm not asking for sympathy.) Both of my parents lived and grew up in Detroit. I've had a close up view of the disintegration of a once fine city. I suppose there are a lot of reasons for the current failure of Detroit. Many say its decline began with the 1967 riots. I remember those riots well, even though I was safe in my suburban home, and got no closer than newspaper and TV reports. Except for the first day of the riot. I was at a baseball game at Tiger Stadium, a short distance from 12th Street, where the riot began. We knew nothing at the time, but we did notice smoke rising in the distance and paddy wagons on the drive home.

Between then and now, the city has suffered through the long reign of Coleman Young and the abbreviated reign of Kwame Kilpatrick. Both of these men were freely elected, so one would have to assume that much of Detroit's downfall is self imposed. Yes, there was also the generation of "white flight" after the riots. Detroit public schools are so bad that parents who can, take their children out to my district and other suburban districts. The antics of the Detroit School Board have been news fodder for decades. They've hired, eaten, and spit out superintendent after superintendent. And some of those superintendents were less than stellar. Right now, they're in the process of firing the latest one.

As embarrassing as the Detroit School Board has been over the years, the city council has set the standard for lunacy. That's clear from this editorial by Nolan Finley of the Detroit News, which I'm reprinting in its entirety. Read it and weep for Detroit. Or laugh. After all, these people were freely elected and reelected by Detroit's citizens.

Nowhere is Michigan's brain drain on greater display than in the Detroit City Council chambers.

My hopes for Detroit's future faded as I watched the tape of last Tuesday's council meeting, the one that considered the Cobo Center expansion deal.

It was a tragic circus, a festival of ignorance that confirmed the No. 1 obstacle to Detroit's progress is the bargain basement leaders that city voters elect. The black nationalism that is now the dominant ideology of the council was on proud display, both at the table and in the audience.

Speakers advocating for the deal were taunted by the crowd and cut short by Council President Monica Conyers, who presided over the hearing like an angry bulldog; whites were advised by the citizens to, "Go home."

Opponents were allowed to rant and ramble on uninterrupted about "those people" who want to steal Detroit's assets and profit from the city's labors.

A pitiful Teamster official who practically crawled to the table on his knees expressing profuse respect for this disrespectful body was battered by both the crowd and the council.

When he dared suggest that an improved Cobo Center would create more good-paying jobs for union workers, Conyers reminded him, "Those workers look like you; they don't look like me."

Desperate, he invoked President Barack Obama's message of unity and was angrily warned, "Don't yousay his name here."

Juxtapose the place and the faces and imagine a white Livonia City Council treating a black union representative with such overt racial hostility. The Justice Department would swoop down like a hawk, and the Rev. Al Sharpton would clog Five Mile Road with protesters.

But in Detroit, dealing with the council's bigotry is part of the cost of doing business. As is dealing with its incompetence. (I'll pause here and excuse from that indictment Sheila Cockrel and Brenda Jones, who supported the Cobo deal, as did Kwame Kenyatta, who although he's an avowed nationalist, most often votes in the city's best interests.)

Emmet Moten, the developer who just opened the Fort Shelby Hotel downtown, was at the meeting and found it appalling. Moten went to Lansing in 1983 on behalf of Mayor Coleman Young to successfully lobby for a regional tax to support Cobo.

"And now we're saying, 'We don't want your money,'" Moten says. "If Coleman were alive today, he'd be outraged. It hurts, it really hurts."

Now, Moten says, "we Detroiters gotta be outraged."

Outraged enough to go to the polls in November and elect a brighter, more responsible council. Moten and others I talked with this week are encouraged that mayoral primary voters picked Dave Bing and Ken Cockrel Jr., the two most rational candidates on the ballot.

The test now will be whether it's those primary voters or the angry council crowd who represent the real Detroit.

As Moten notes, "You can't fix this for us. We have to fix it ourselves."

Nobody can help Detroit if voters again elect a City Council composed of separatists, clueless dowagers and the apparently insane.

There they are, exposed as both stupid and racist.

It gets better though. Union leaders in Detroit are willing to excuse Monica Conyers blatant racism.

Union officials agree that Conyers, who is black, was likely trying to make a valid point -- a desire to see more minorities in construction jobs -- but her presentation could have used some polish.

"I think she spoke without thinking, and it was totally unnecessary and something that should have not been said," said Leamon Wilson, chairman of the 18 presidents of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees locals that represent city employees. "Building trades have not integrated like we would like to see, but I don't think that comment should have been made like that. "That was totally improper," said Wilson, who is black.

and

John Riehl, president of AFSCME Local 207, representing hundreds of Detroit Water and Sewerage Department workers, said there is a separation of growth in the labor movement between public employees, auto workers and steelworkers -- more diverse unions -- as opposed to the building-trade and construction unions.

"President Conyers touched on an important issue that is a global battle, and really an affirmative action issue," said Riehl, who is white. "Her point is that we must keep the employment levels up for black Detroiters, both as public employees and construction workers, and that is totally supportable. Detroiters are very keen on keeping as much work in Detroit as possible and keeping black Detroiters employed. Detroit is an 85% black city, and people want to see their neighbors working."

So what is the message here? Union leaders who depend on the largesse of the Detroit City Clowns - uh - council will excuse hatred, racism, and outright stupidity.

Also, this hasn't been made public, and I'm betting that there is a serious effort to hush this up, and I may be the only person to realize what's going to happen, so listen carefully. It's obvious to me, that in the name of Affirmative Action and diversity (which has replaced skill and competence as the defining factor in hiring workers) the construction trades need more workers who look like Monica Conyers. Are there blacks and minorities - oh, and women - who are seeking these jobs? I don't know, but if not, here's what's going to happen. Union leaders will be staking out bars and lounges where men (and women) gather. They will buy these men (and women) drinks. The drinks will drugged. Men (and women) will disappear, only to reappear as apprentices on job sites around the city. They will claim to be voluntarily working these jobs, but in reality, they and their families will be hostages of the unions, forced to labor for long hours at union wages (and benefits) so that Detroit and its unions can claim a racially and gender based diverse work force.

So Detroit is destined to remain the armpit of the nation as minority members get shanghied into working construction, and Detroit voters continue to elect incompetents. It will continue until Detroit is completely empty and some brave citizen explorers go back into the deserted city to reclaim it.

Labels: Detroit, Detroit City Council, Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, Monica Conyers, Nolan Finley

posted by Harry @ 5:16 PM 4 comments

Are We Healed Yet?

Some people, no matter how much they deny it, are obsessed with skin color. I don't want to claim that all liberals are racists though, just some of them. After all, some of my best friends are - um - liberal . . . really. With Obama's election to the presidency, the obsession with race, rather than abating, seems to have increased. Take Rochelle Riley's column in the Detroit Free Press. On the one hand, she does call on Detroit's black community to adopt an "I can" attitude.

On the other hand,

But black America must not miss Tuesday's greater lesson: Even as white people reevaluate their prejudices, black Americans -- some, not all -- must embrace a new standard of achievement.

Those accursed white people and their prejudices! They surely must be the only people on Earth who still harbor prejudices. Thank God they have reevaluated them.

Later in the piece,

We must work, regardless of race, using a language that doesn't split our country into colors and cultures, one that doesn't include words from a past our children do not remember. Black Americans must demand more of each other.

Does that include white people now that we have reevaluated our prejudices? (Well, except for me, you see . . . shhh, don't let this get out, but I didn't quite vote for Obama).

Rather than harping on the prejudices of white people, how about an examination of the prejudices of liberals? I googled it and came up empty, so I'm sure Ms. Riley wrote nothing on the liberal and black racist campaign against Maryland's Lt. Governor when he ran for the Senate. However, according to an article in the Washington Times, by way of Michelle Malkin,

Black Democratic leaders in Maryland say that racially tinged attacks against Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele in his bid for the U.S. Senate are fair because he is a conservative Republican.

Such attacks against the first black man to win a statewide election in Maryland include pelting him with Oreo cookies during a campaign appearance, calling him an “Uncle Tom” and depicting him as a black-faced minstrel on a liberal Web log.

Operatives for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) also obtained a copy of his credit report — the only Republican candidate so targeted.

But black Democrats say there is nothing wrong with “pointing out the obvious.”

Am I the only one who smells an insane and insulting double standard at work?

Malkin, of course, because she is officially a "woman of color" and therefore automatically afforded protected minority status, is routinely and viciously attacked by liberals and progressives because she dares to think for herself and embrace a conservative point of view. Since she doesn't toe the accepted party line, her protection has been stripped away and she's fair game . . . for the Left.

But Rochelle Riley and other members of the Obamanation don't want to admit, that much of the prejudice, hatred, and intolerance is a manifestation of the Left and is based on their self-image of moral superiority. This self-image has a long way to go before it gets close to reality.

Labels: Detroit Free Press, Michelle Malkin, Obama, Rochelle Riley, the Left

posted by Harry @ 5:27 PM 4 comments