Posts
My concerns for America Monday, July 28, 2008 - The WASHINGTON TIMES JOHN VOIGHT
We, as parents, are well aware of the importance of our teachers who teach and program our children. We also know how important it is for our children to play with good-thinking children growing up.
Sen. Barack Obama has grown up with the teaching of very angry, militant white and black people: the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers and Rev. Michael Pfleger. We cannot say we are not affected by teachers who are militant and angry. We know too well that we become like them, and Mr. Obama will run this country in their mindset.
The Democratic Party, in its quest for power, has managed a propaganda campaign with subliminal messages, creating a God-like figure in a man who falls short in every way. It seems to me that if Mr. Obama wins the presidential election, then Messrs. Farrakhan, Wright, Ayers and Pfleger will gain power for their need to demoralize this country and help create a socialist America.
The Democrats have targeted young people, knowing how easy it is to bring forth whatever is needed to program their minds. I know this process well. I was caught up in the hysteria during the Vietnam era, which was brought about through Marxist propaganda underlying the so-called peace movement. The radicals of that era were successful in giving the communists power to bring forth the killing fields and slaughter 2.5 million people in Cambodia and South Vietnam. Did they stop the war, or did they bring the war to those innocent people? In the end, they turned their backs on all the horror and suffering they helped create and walked away.
Those same leaders who were in the streets in the '60s are very powerful today in their work to bring down the Iraq war and to attack our president, and they have found their way into our schools. William Ayers is a good example of that.
Thank God, today, we have a strong generation of young soldiers who know exactly who they are and what they must do to protect our freedom and our democracy. And we have the leadership of Gen. David Petraeus, who has brought hope and stability to Iraq and prevented the terrorists from establishing a base in that country. Our soldiers are lifting us to an example of patriotism at a time when we've almost forgotten who we are and what is at stake.
If Mr. Obama had his way, he would have pulled our troops from Iraq years ago and initiated an unprecedented bloodbath, turning over that country to the barbarianism of our enemies. With what he has openly stated about his plans for our military, and his lack of understanding about the true nature of our enemies, there's not a cell in my body that can accept the idea that Mr. Obama can keep us safe from the terrorists around the world, and from Iran, which is making great strides toward getting the atomic bomb. And while a misleading portrait of Mr. Obama is being perpetrated by a media controlled by the Democrats, the Obama camp has sent out people to attack the greatness of Sen. John McCain, whose suffering and courage in a Hanoi prison camp is an American legend.
Gen. Wesley Clark, who himself has shame upon him, having been relieved of his command, has done their bidding and become a lying fool in his need to demean a fellow soldier and a true hero.
This is a perilous time, and more than ever, the world needs a united and strong America. If, God forbid, we live to see Mr. Obama president, we will live through a socialist era that America has not seen before, and our country will be weakened in every way.
Jon Voight is an Academy Award-winning actor who is well-known for his humanitarian work.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Sicko
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Dear Friends:
Michael Moore ends the movie "Sicko" with a lie. It may not be an intentional lie, but it is a falsehood, nonetheless. Michael Moore ends the movie saying that every European country offers "free" health coverage to their citizens and every European country provides such coverage through a "single payer" system.
Both statements are untrue. It is a sad commentary on the pathetically, uninformed state of the health care policy debate in America that health care journalists and American political leaders do not simply know that both of the statements are untrue and that they have not responded clearly and quickly to correct the error.
So what makes these statements untrue? Reality. Most European countries directly charge their citizens for their health coverage. It is not "free" anywhere. Some nations require people to buy coverage from health insurance companies that look very much like American health insurance companies. Other countries use a payroll tax on everyone's paycheck to pay for health coverage. In those countries, each citizen pays a portion of their weekly paycheck for health insurance - - just like our Social Security payroll deduction. In Germany, each employee pays 7 percent of each paycheck for health care and each employer matches that 7 percent. People also can spend additional money to buy better coverage.
The government of the Netherlands takes 9 percent of a worker's paycheck every week to purchase health coverage - - it's hard to figure out how Michael Moore can legitimately call such a payroll deduction "free."
Also, when the government of the Netherlands deducts that 9 percent, or when Germany deducts their 14 percent -- they do not use, as Mr. Moore incorrectly claims, a "single payer system" like Canada to provide the actual health insurance for each citizen. Each of those countries has multiple health plans - or "sickness funds" -- that people choose among. Citizens of Switzerland and the Netherlands choose between competing health plans to purchase their coverage.
So "Sicko" ends with a double lie: Coverage in Europe is not "free," nor is it provided through a pure, Canadian-like single payer system. "Sicko" either deliberately misleads us or is unintentionally wrong.
Each country in Europe has found its own unique path to universal coverage. Switzerland has no government health program at all. Everyone in Switzerland is required to purchase from one of nearly 100 competing insurance companies. (The Swiss government pays for coverage for the poor.)
What about France - - a country Michael Moore described as Eden in "Sicko?" The government uses a sales tax approach and uses that money to buy a basic (not comprehensive) package of coverage for about 80 percent of the French people. The basic government benefit coverage is somewhat incomplete, however, so 92 percent of the people in France now purchase additional private insurance to fill in the 20 - 40 percent gap in various parts of their government benefits. About 20 percent of the French people skip the government program completely and purchase only private coverage. In either case, the coverage isn't free and is not handled through a Canadian single-payer model.
It's unclear from the movie whether Mr. Moore knows that he is not telling the truth about Europe's health care systems, or whether he is still low on a learning curve relative to health care financing and delivery. The learning curve seems pretty steep. He criticizes the U.S. government Medicare drug benefit in "Sicko," and he claims with some passion that the Canadians handle drug coverage much better. So how does the Canadian government actually handle drug coverage? Seven out of eight provinces do not cover non-hospital drug costs for anyone other than low income seniors. The federal government does not cover anyone.
People in those seven Canadian provinces might actually prefer the American Medicare system of partial coverage (favored by over 80 percent of enrollees), which Mr. Moore seems to sneer at in the movie. American Medicare drug coverage can have a "donut hole" in the middle. Seven of eight Canadian provinces skip the donut and give the citizens only the hole.
"Sicko" also tells the story of a Canadian on a golf vacation in Florida to illustrate the alleged superiority of the Canadian insurance and care delivery system because - - Mr. Moore claims in the movie - - the Canadian actually rushed home to Canada when he needed health care rather than getting that care in Florida. A valuable piece of information that "Sicko" conveniently does not mention at that point is that the Canadian government health coverage does not travel. Americans who are insured almost always have health coverage that covers at least emergencies whenever we travel. Canadians, however, have such long backlogs for care in so many places that the Canadian government benefit program can't afford to let people simply leave Canada to access care elsewhere. So the Canadian system that Mr. Moore so eagerly advocates decided not to let its health care benefits "travel" outside of Canada. Canadians in Florida, therefore, actually do return to Canada for care when they can... not because they don't think Americans deliver quality care, rather because their government does not cover care in America.
Again, it's not clear if Mr. Moore is low on the learning curve on that point, or more directly duplicitous. We will probably learn which statement is true as the debate progresses.
There are rumors Mr. Moore offers $10,000 rewards for anyone who can prove that any point in his movies is untrue. Since he says that "every" country in Europe uses the Canadian model, and since there are quite a few countries in Europe, does he owe $10,000 per country or just $10,000 for getting Europe wrong as a package? Or is it $10,000 per country on "single payer" and another $10,000 per country for "free"?
We can let his conscience decide. Money is owed, however.
Thank you.
Sarah Berk
Executive Director, Health Care America
Dear Friends:
Michael Moore ends the movie "Sicko" with a lie. It may not be an intentional lie, but it is a falsehood, nonetheless. Michael Moore ends the movie saying that every European country offers "free" health coverage to their citizens and every European country provides such coverage through a "single payer" system.
Both statements are untrue. It is a sad commentary on the pathetically, uninformed state of the health care policy debate in America that health care journalists and American political leaders do not simply know that both of the statements are untrue and that they have not responded clearly and quickly to correct the error.
So what makes these statements untrue? Reality. Most European countries directly charge their citizens for their health coverage. It is not "free" anywhere. Some nations require people to buy coverage from health insurance companies that look very much like American health insurance companies. Other countries use a payroll tax on everyone's paycheck to pay for health coverage. In those countries, each citizen pays a portion of their weekly paycheck for health insurance - - just like our Social Security payroll deduction. In Germany, each employee pays 7 percent of each paycheck for health care and each employer matches that 7 percent. People also can spend additional money to buy better coverage.
The government of the Netherlands takes 9 percent of a worker's paycheck every week to purchase health coverage - - it's hard to figure out how Michael Moore can legitimately call such a payroll deduction "free."
Also, when the government of the Netherlands deducts that 9 percent, or when Germany deducts their 14 percent -- they do not use, as Mr. Moore incorrectly claims, a "single payer system" like Canada to provide the actual health insurance for each citizen. Each of those countries has multiple health plans - or "sickness funds" -- that people choose among. Citizens of Switzerland and the Netherlands choose between competing health plans to purchase their coverage.
So "Sicko" ends with a double lie: Coverage in Europe is not "free," nor is it provided through a pure, Canadian-like single payer system. "Sicko" either deliberately misleads us or is unintentionally wrong.
Each country in Europe has found its own unique path to universal coverage. Switzerland has no government health program at all. Everyone in Switzerland is required to purchase from one of nearly 100 competing insurance companies. (The Swiss government pays for coverage for the poor.)
What about France - - a country Michael Moore described as Eden in "Sicko?" The government uses a sales tax approach and uses that money to buy a basic (not comprehensive) package of coverage for about 80 percent of the French people. The basic government benefit coverage is somewhat incomplete, however, so 92 percent of the people in France now purchase additional private insurance to fill in the 20 - 40 percent gap in various parts of their government benefits. About 20 percent of the French people skip the government program completely and purchase only private coverage. In either case, the coverage isn't free and is not handled through a Canadian single-payer model.
It's unclear from the movie whether Mr. Moore knows that he is not telling the truth about Europe's health care systems, or whether he is still low on a learning curve relative to health care financing and delivery. The learning curve seems pretty steep. He criticizes the U.S. government Medicare drug benefit in "Sicko," and he claims with some passion that the Canadians handle drug coverage much better. So how does the Canadian government actually handle drug coverage? Seven out of eight provinces do not cover non-hospital drug costs for anyone other than low income seniors. The federal government does not cover anyone.
People in those seven Canadian provinces might actually prefer the American Medicare system of partial coverage (favored by over 80 percent of enrollees), which Mr. Moore seems to sneer at in the movie. American Medicare drug coverage can have a "donut hole" in the middle. Seven of eight Canadian provinces skip the donut and give the citizens only the hole.
"Sicko" also tells the story of a Canadian on a golf vacation in Florida to illustrate the alleged superiority of the Canadian insurance and care delivery system because - - Mr. Moore claims in the movie - - the Canadian actually rushed home to Canada when he needed health care rather than getting that care in Florida. A valuable piece of information that "Sicko" conveniently does not mention at that point is that the Canadian government health coverage does not travel. Americans who are insured almost always have health coverage that covers at least emergencies whenever we travel. Canadians, however, have such long backlogs for care in so many places that the Canadian government benefit program can't afford to let people simply leave Canada to access care elsewhere. So the Canadian system that Mr. Moore so eagerly advocates decided not to let its health care benefits "travel" outside of Canada. Canadians in Florida, therefore, actually do return to Canada for care when they can... not because they don't think Americans deliver quality care, rather because their government does not cover care in America.
Again, it's not clear if Mr. Moore is low on the learning curve on that point, or more directly duplicitous. We will probably learn which statement is true as the debate progresses.
There are rumors Mr. Moore offers $10,000 rewards for anyone who can prove that any point in his movies is untrue. Since he says that "every" country in Europe uses the Canadian model, and since there are quite a few countries in Europe, does he owe $10,000 per country or just $10,000 for getting Europe wrong as a package? Or is it $10,000 per country on "single payer" and another $10,000 per country for "free"?
We can let his conscience decide. Money is owed, however.
Thank you.
Sarah Berk
Executive Director, Health Care America
WMDs
Assuming Irag had no WMD because only small caches were recovered after OIF began is dangerously flawed logic.
For Reid, Pelosi, Durbin, Kennedy, Kerry and others still "Stuck on Stupid", and insisting that there were no WMD found in Iraq, here's a partial list of what didn't make it out of Iraq before the OIF invasion: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium, 1,700 gallons of chemical-weapon agents, chemical warheads containing the nerve agent cyclosarin, radioactive materials in powdered form designed for dispersal over population centers, artillery projectiles loaded with binary chemical agents, etc. (But Saddam had no WMD!)
It is dangerously flawed logic to assume that because only small caches of WMD were recovered, Iraq had no WMD.
As The Patriot noted in October, 2002, our well-placed sources in the region and intelligence sources with the NSA and NRO estimated that the UN Security Council's foot-dragging provided an ample window for Saddam to export some or all of his deadliest WMD materials and components. At that time, we reported that Allied Forces would be unlikely to discover Iraq's WMD stores, noting, "Our sources estimate that Iraq has shipped some or all of its biological stockpiles and nuclear WMD components into Iran and through Syria to southern Lebanon's heavily fortified Bekaa Valley."
For Reid, Pelosi, Durbin, Kennedy, Kerry and others still "Stuck on Stupid", and insisting that there were no WMD found in Iraq, here's a partial list of what didn't make it out of Iraq before the OIF invasion: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium, 1,700 gallons of chemical-weapon agents, chemical warheads containing the nerve agent cyclosarin, radioactive materials in powdered form designed for dispersal over population centers, artillery projectiles loaded with binary chemical agents, etc. (But Saddam had no WMD!)
It is dangerously flawed logic to assume that because only small caches of WMD were recovered, Iraq had no WMD.
As The Patriot noted in October, 2002, our well-placed sources in the region and intelligence sources with the NSA and NRO estimated that the UN Security Council's foot-dragging provided an ample window for Saddam to export some or all of his deadliest WMD materials and components. At that time, we reported that Allied Forces would be unlikely to discover Iraq's WMD stores, noting, "Our sources estimate that Iraq has shipped some or all of its biological stockpiles and nuclear WMD components into Iran and through Syria to southern Lebanon's heavily fortified Bekaa Valley."
Dems and Saddam
Friday, Dec. 2, 2005 8:59 a.m. EST
Dems Back Saddam Hussein in New Poll
Democrats have given Saddam Hussein a shocking vote of confidence in the latest Fox News Opinion Dynamics survey, with a solid plurality saying the world would be better off if the Butcher of Baghdad was still in power.
Forty-one percent of Democrats gave Saddam a thumbs up, while just 34 percent said Iraq is better served with the murderous dictator gone, reports the New York Post.
In stark contrast, 78 percent of Republicans said toppling the mass-murdering leader left everyone better off. Just 10 percent said they wished Saddam still ruled Iraq.
On the question of whether President Bush lied to the American people about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, 72 percent of Democrats say he did.
Seventy-nine percent of Republicans disagreed, however -- saying that Bush gave the American people the best intelligence he had at the time.
Dems Back Saddam Hussein in New Poll
Democrats have given Saddam Hussein a shocking vote of confidence in the latest Fox News Opinion Dynamics survey, with a solid plurality saying the world would be better off if the Butcher of Baghdad was still in power.
Forty-one percent of Democrats gave Saddam a thumbs up, while just 34 percent said Iraq is better served with the murderous dictator gone, reports the New York Post.
In stark contrast, 78 percent of Republicans said toppling the mass-murdering leader left everyone better off. Just 10 percent said they wished Saddam still ruled Iraq.
On the question of whether President Bush lied to the American people about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, 72 percent of Democrats say he did.
Seventy-nine percent of Republicans disagreed, however -- saying that Bush gave the American people the best intelligence he had at the time.
Iraq Like MNF?
Imagine MNF Being Covered Like Iraq - By Jon Ham November 30, 2005
RALEIGH — Watching Monday Night Football the other night, it occurred to me that if one imagined the mainstream media covering that game the way they cover the war in Iraq (or the economy), the absurdity of their reporting would be plain for all to see.
INDIANAPOLIS — The Indianapolis Colts, seeking to silence critics who say they are overrated, fell short of that mark on Monday night by outscoring the Pittsburgh Steelers by a mere 3-point margin in the first quarter.
Despite the unspectacular first-quarter margin, Colts head coach Tony Dungy insisted that his team was winning the battle. “Hey, we’re up three,” said Dungy. “In my book that’s a lead.” But critics pointed out that the Colts gained their lead only as a result of a desperation 80-yard pass by quarterback Peyton Manning to Marvin Harrison on their first play of the game.
“That score was based on subterfuge and was patently unfair,” said one critic, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation by league officials. “It amounted to abuse of opposing players to fool them like that.”
Despite scoring on their first snap of the game, and later scoring a field goal to go up 10-0, the Colts allowed Pittsburgh to score with only 1:18 left in the first quarter. Colt critics demanded that Dungy acknowledge that he had made coaching mistakes in the quarter, but he refused to do so.
The Colts have become a target of critics since going undefeated so far this year. That so many Colt players have openly expressed a desire to go undefeated the whole season is seen as arrogance and a sense of exceptionalism by many, causing many former friends to turn against them.
The staunch Pittsburgh defense, though out-manned and out-gunned, managed to battle the Colts to a standstill in the second quarter, allowing them only six points. Those familiar with the Colts say this second-quarter swoon reveals a lack of depth on offense due to unmet recruitment goals during the off-season.
The insurgent Steelers, striking sporadically with lesser equipment against the hegemonic Colts, inflicted serious damage with several tackles, a sack and some pass breakups, holding Indianapolis to only two field goals in the 15-minute span. Observers said it looked as if the tide were turning in favor of the insurgent Steelers.
In the third period, the Steelers again held the Colts to a single touchdown, damaging the Colts’ aura of invincibility and giving hope to the insurgents that their time would come. Some critics pointed to the stands as some Colt fans began filing out, saying that this showed the Colts losing support at home.
The Steelers were even stronger in the final period, holding the Colt juggernaut to a mere three points. “I think Indianapolis was just in the wrong game, at the wrong place at the wrong time,” one Colt critic was heard to say.
The final score, by the way, was Colts 26, Steelers 7.
Jon Ham is vice president of the John Locke Foundation and publisher of its newspaper, Carolina Journal.
http://www.carolinajournal.com/mediamangle/display_story.html?id=2959
RALEIGH — Watching Monday Night Football the other night, it occurred to me that if one imagined the mainstream media covering that game the way they cover the war in Iraq (or the economy), the absurdity of their reporting would be plain for all to see.
INDIANAPOLIS — The Indianapolis Colts, seeking to silence critics who say they are overrated, fell short of that mark on Monday night by outscoring the Pittsburgh Steelers by a mere 3-point margin in the first quarter.
Despite the unspectacular first-quarter margin, Colts head coach Tony Dungy insisted that his team was winning the battle. “Hey, we’re up three,” said Dungy. “In my book that’s a lead.” But critics pointed out that the Colts gained their lead only as a result of a desperation 80-yard pass by quarterback Peyton Manning to Marvin Harrison on their first play of the game.
“That score was based on subterfuge and was patently unfair,” said one critic, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation by league officials. “It amounted to abuse of opposing players to fool them like that.”
Despite scoring on their first snap of the game, and later scoring a field goal to go up 10-0, the Colts allowed Pittsburgh to score with only 1:18 left in the first quarter. Colt critics demanded that Dungy acknowledge that he had made coaching mistakes in the quarter, but he refused to do so.
The Colts have become a target of critics since going undefeated so far this year. That so many Colt players have openly expressed a desire to go undefeated the whole season is seen as arrogance and a sense of exceptionalism by many, causing many former friends to turn against them.
The staunch Pittsburgh defense, though out-manned and out-gunned, managed to battle the Colts to a standstill in the second quarter, allowing them only six points. Those familiar with the Colts say this second-quarter swoon reveals a lack of depth on offense due to unmet recruitment goals during the off-season.
The insurgent Steelers, striking sporadically with lesser equipment against the hegemonic Colts, inflicted serious damage with several tackles, a sack and some pass breakups, holding Indianapolis to only two field goals in the 15-minute span. Observers said it looked as if the tide were turning in favor of the insurgent Steelers.
In the third period, the Steelers again held the Colts to a single touchdown, damaging the Colts’ aura of invincibility and giving hope to the insurgents that their time would come. Some critics pointed to the stands as some Colt fans began filing out, saying that this showed the Colts losing support at home.
The Steelers were even stronger in the final period, holding the Colt juggernaut to a mere three points. “I think Indianapolis was just in the wrong game, at the wrong place at the wrong time,” one Colt critic was heard to say.
The final score, by the way, was Colts 26, Steelers 7.
Jon Ham is vice president of the John Locke Foundation and publisher of its newspaper, Carolina Journal.
http://www.carolinajournal.com/mediamangle/display_story.html?id=2959
Muslims-Not Mine
Muslim outrage huh. OK ... let's do a little historical review. Just some lowlights:
* Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.
* A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia.Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.
* Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.
* Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.
Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage ... but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.
* Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.
* A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia.Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.
* Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.
* Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.
Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage ... but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.
Give Me A Break
Excerpt: John Stossel's 'Give Me a Break'
'20/20' Co-Anchor Challenges the Status Quo in New Book
John Stossel, consumer reporter and 20/20 co-anchor, takes on regulators, lawyers, and politicians in a new book, "Give Me a Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats and Scam Artists and Became the Scourge of the Liberal Media." Below is an excerpt from Chapter One.
Chapter One
What Happened to Stossel? Journalism without a moral position is impossible. — Marguerite Duras
I was once a heroic consumer reporter; now I'm a threat to journalism.
As a consumer reporter, I exposed con men and thieves, confronting them with hidden camera footage that unmasked their lies, put some out of business, and helped send the worst of them to jail. The Dallas Morning News called me the "bravest and best of television's consumer reporters." Marvin Kitman of Newsday said I was "the man who makes 'em squirm," whose "investigations of the unjust and wicked … are models." Jonathan Mandell of the New York Daily News quoted a WCBS official who "proudly" said, "No one's offended more people than John Stossel."
Ah, "proudly." Those were the days. My colleagues liked it when I offended people. They called my reporting "hard-hitting," "a public service." I won 18 Emmys, and lots of other journalism awards. One year I got so many Emmys, another winner thanked me in his acceptance speech "for not having an entry in this category."
Then I did a terrible thing. Instead of just applying my skepticism to business, I applied it to government and "public interest" groups. This apparently violated a religious tenet of journalism. Suddenly I was no longer "objective."
Ralph Nader said I "used to be on the cutting edge," but had become "lazy and dishonest." According to Brill's Content, "Nader was a fan during Stossel's consumer advocate days," but "now talks about him as if he'd been afflicted with a mysterious disease."
These days, I rarely get awards from my peers. Some of my ABC colleagues look away when they see me in the halls. Web sites call my reporting "hurtful, biased, absurd." "What happened to Stossel?" they ask. CNN invited me to be a guest on a journalism show; when I arrived at the studio, I discovered they'd titled it "Objectivity and Journalism — Does John Stossel Practice Either?" People now e-mail me, calling me "a corporate whore" and a "sellout."
How did I get from there to here? This book is the story of my professional and intellectual journey.
The Making of a Contrarian
I never planned to be a reporter. In college, when I tried to write a story for the school newspaper, the editors sneered and said, "Leave the writing to us." I was never much of a public speaker. I'm kind of shy, and I stutter. It all happened because I wanted to postpone graduate school.
I'd been accepted by the University of Chicago's School of Hospital Management, but I was sick of school. I was an indifferent student. I daydreamed through half my classes at Princeton, and applied to grad school only because I was ambitious, and grad school seemed like the right path for a 21-year-old who wanted to get ahead. Hospital management sounded like a useful and interesting career. But before I headed for the University of Chicago, I took a job. I thought the stress of a real job would make me appreciate school, and then I would embrace graduate studies with renewed vigor.
Every time a company sent a recruiter to Princeton, I volunteered for an interview. I got a dozen job offers and took the one that offered me a free flight that would take me the farthest: Seattle Magazine. They said they'd teach me how to sell advertising or do bookkeeping. But by the time I graduated, Seattle Magazine had gone out of business. I was lucky, though: Ancil Payne, the boss of the parent company, King Broadcasting, called me to say, "We have a job available at KGW, our Portland, Oregon, TV station. Want to try that?"
I said yes, although I had never thought about a career in TV news. I'd never even watched much of it. I had no journalism training. In Portland I started as a newsroom gofer and worked my way up. I researched stories for others. Then, after studying how the anchormen spoke, I started writing stories for them. A few years later the news director told me to go on the air and read what I wrote. I reluctantly tried, but I was horrible at it — nervous, awkward, scared. When I watched a tape of my performance, I was embarrassed. But I persisted because I had to succeed. When I was growing up, my mother had repeatedly warned me that if I didn't study hard, get into a good college, and succeed in a profession, I would "freeze in the dark." I believed it.
I was also determined to keep pace with my brother Tom, who was the superstar of the family. While I partied and played poker, he studied hard, got top grades, and went to Harvard Medical School. Since I knew there was no way I could compete with Tom in his field, I tried to become a success in the profession I'd stumbled into.
In retrospect, I see that it probably helped me that I had taken no journalism courses. Television news was still inventing itself then, and I was open to new ideas. I learned through fear. My fear of failure made me desperate to do the job well, to try to figure out what people really needed to know and how I could say it in a way that would work well on TV.
From Give Me a Break. © 2004 by John Stossel. All rights reserved. Harpercollins Publishers.
Copyright © 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures
'20/20' Co-Anchor Challenges the Status Quo in New Book
John Stossel, consumer reporter and 20/20 co-anchor, takes on regulators, lawyers, and politicians in a new book, "Give Me a Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats and Scam Artists and Became the Scourge of the Liberal Media." Below is an excerpt from Chapter One.
Chapter One
What Happened to Stossel? Journalism without a moral position is impossible. — Marguerite Duras
I was once a heroic consumer reporter; now I'm a threat to journalism.
As a consumer reporter, I exposed con men and thieves, confronting them with hidden camera footage that unmasked their lies, put some out of business, and helped send the worst of them to jail. The Dallas Morning News called me the "bravest and best of television's consumer reporters." Marvin Kitman of Newsday said I was "the man who makes 'em squirm," whose "investigations of the unjust and wicked … are models." Jonathan Mandell of the New York Daily News quoted a WCBS official who "proudly" said, "No one's offended more people than John Stossel."
Ah, "proudly." Those were the days. My colleagues liked it when I offended people. They called my reporting "hard-hitting," "a public service." I won 18 Emmys, and lots of other journalism awards. One year I got so many Emmys, another winner thanked me in his acceptance speech "for not having an entry in this category."
Then I did a terrible thing. Instead of just applying my skepticism to business, I applied it to government and "public interest" groups. This apparently violated a religious tenet of journalism. Suddenly I was no longer "objective."
Ralph Nader said I "used to be on the cutting edge," but had become "lazy and dishonest." According to Brill's Content, "Nader was a fan during Stossel's consumer advocate days," but "now talks about him as if he'd been afflicted with a mysterious disease."
These days, I rarely get awards from my peers. Some of my ABC colleagues look away when they see me in the halls. Web sites call my reporting "hurtful, biased, absurd." "What happened to Stossel?" they ask. CNN invited me to be a guest on a journalism show; when I arrived at the studio, I discovered they'd titled it "Objectivity and Journalism — Does John Stossel Practice Either?" People now e-mail me, calling me "a corporate whore" and a "sellout."
How did I get from there to here? This book is the story of my professional and intellectual journey.
The Making of a Contrarian
I never planned to be a reporter. In college, when I tried to write a story for the school newspaper, the editors sneered and said, "Leave the writing to us." I was never much of a public speaker. I'm kind of shy, and I stutter. It all happened because I wanted to postpone graduate school.
I'd been accepted by the University of Chicago's School of Hospital Management, but I was sick of school. I was an indifferent student. I daydreamed through half my classes at Princeton, and applied to grad school only because I was ambitious, and grad school seemed like the right path for a 21-year-old who wanted to get ahead. Hospital management sounded like a useful and interesting career. But before I headed for the University of Chicago, I took a job. I thought the stress of a real job would make me appreciate school, and then I would embrace graduate studies with renewed vigor.
Every time a company sent a recruiter to Princeton, I volunteered for an interview. I got a dozen job offers and took the one that offered me a free flight that would take me the farthest: Seattle Magazine. They said they'd teach me how to sell advertising or do bookkeeping. But by the time I graduated, Seattle Magazine had gone out of business. I was lucky, though: Ancil Payne, the boss of the parent company, King Broadcasting, called me to say, "We have a job available at KGW, our Portland, Oregon, TV station. Want to try that?"
I said yes, although I had never thought about a career in TV news. I'd never even watched much of it. I had no journalism training. In Portland I started as a newsroom gofer and worked my way up. I researched stories for others. Then, after studying how the anchormen spoke, I started writing stories for them. A few years later the news director told me to go on the air and read what I wrote. I reluctantly tried, but I was horrible at it — nervous, awkward, scared. When I watched a tape of my performance, I was embarrassed. But I persisted because I had to succeed. When I was growing up, my mother had repeatedly warned me that if I didn't study hard, get into a good college, and succeed in a profession, I would "freeze in the dark." I believed it.
I was also determined to keep pace with my brother Tom, who was the superstar of the family. While I partied and played poker, he studied hard, got top grades, and went to Harvard Medical School. Since I knew there was no way I could compete with Tom in his field, I tried to become a success in the profession I'd stumbled into.
In retrospect, I see that it probably helped me that I had taken no journalism courses. Television news was still inventing itself then, and I was open to new ideas. I learned through fear. My fear of failure made me desperate to do the job well, to try to figure out what people really needed to know and how I could say it in a way that would work well on TV.
From Give Me a Break. © 2004 by John Stossel. All rights reserved. Harpercollins Publishers.
Copyright © 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures
Taxes
http://www.heritage.org/Research/features/budgetchartbook/fed-rev-spend-2008-boc-T4-The-Top-10-Percent-of-Income.html
Single flat sales tax is fair, and it solves some problems. By SCOTT BURNS - Universal Press Syndicate
C.C. in Houston writes to say there is nothing fair about the Fair Tax plan for a single flat sales tax. He quotes a letter from another concerned citizen to the editor of the Houston Chronicle. "The so-called Fair Tax scheme is a blatant attempt by the wealthy to reduce their tax payments. I call it the 'unfair tax,' as it will tax consumption rather than income. Those in the lower- to middle-income brackets usually spend most all of their income on necessities and can't save. They would be taxed on practically 100 percent of their income. Retirees, whose income may require them to pay no taxes, would end up paying taxes on all of the money they spend, which would greatly reduce their purchasing power.
'What's fair about that?'
"On the other hand, those who make more than they spend, and indeed those whose incomes greatly exceed their expenditures, would pay taxes on significantly less of their incomes, proportionally. What's fair about that? In fact it is a total reversal of the graduated tax system that we now have where we pay taxes based on our ability to pay. Our current system is certainly flawed and needs major overhauling, but it is still the fairest method of taxation.
"Let's fix the system we have rather than shifting the tax burden to lower-income Americans."
I've heard this argument before. It doesn't hold water. I believe that junking the current tax system — in its entirety — would create a modestly graduated tax system with a very broad base, consumption. By replacing both the income tax and the employment tax (among others) with a single sales tax, we would accomplish these good things:
•Eliminate the fastest-growing and most regressive tax in our lifetime, the employment tax.
•Massively broaden the tax base from only some income to all consumption.
•Eliminate the corporate income tax and the entrenched corrupting lobbies that it has engendered.
•Make visible, for the first time, the size of our collective tax burden.
•Save the incredible amount of time and money wasted on tax planning and scheming.
•Create a path for dealing with the unfunded liabilities of Social Security by increasing the tax base that supports it.
•End the biannual festival of finger-pointing and envy that has become the hallmark of every election cycle.
•Remove the embedded expense wedge that reduces the competitive position of American-made goods.
The Fair Tax proposal calls for giving all households a "pre-bate" of what they would pay in sales taxes for the necessities of life. The pre-bate would be paid to households monthly, eliminating the burden of taxes on our poorest families. Because of the pre-bate, the new tax would amount to a graduated tax. The argument that poor people save little and rich people save much is a red herring because it ignores two realities.
Benefit is consumption
First, the only benefit from having money is what we can consume with it. If you earn money that is not spent, you are deriving no immediate benefit from the money and shouldn't pay taxes on it. As long as the money not spent is used in our economy, it is providing benefits to everyone in the form of new investment, new jobs and working capital.
Second, many people who are rich or well-off spend more than their income on consumption because they are spending a portion of their capital. Some of that capital would not be taxed at all in the current system. The portion that was capital gain would be taxed at only 15 percent. With the Fair Tax, the very rich would pay taxes on all consumption. This includes mega yachts, wine cellars, and much other consumption that is taxed lightly or not at all. Instead, they would pay at the higher sales tax rate.
Right now our entire tax system is stacked against the young. The burden is getting worse, not better. It is possible that some older people would pay more in taxes than they do under the current system. That would only happen, however, if they had significant assets that they spent on consumption. In that case, the sales tax would be highly progressive. It would tax those with assets that were used for consumption. It would not tax those who had no assets to use for consumption.
The only people who should fear the Fair Tax are the politicians, who would lose their tools for extortion. Most public polls show that more than 50 percent of the voting public — left, right and middle — favor a radical reform of our tax system. So let's take a poll. Send me an e-mail at scott@scottburns.com.
Put "Keep it the way it is" in the subject line if you like our current tax system. Put "Go for the Fair Tax" if you'd like to see broad reform. I'll report the results in the future.
Questions about personal finance may be sent to: SCOTT BURNS, P.O. Box 655237, Dallas, TX 75265; e-mail can be sent to scott@scottburns.com. Burns' Web page is www.scottburns.com.
Single flat sales tax is fair, and it solves some problems. By SCOTT BURNS - Universal Press Syndicate
C.C. in Houston writes to say there is nothing fair about the Fair Tax plan for a single flat sales tax. He quotes a letter from another concerned citizen to the editor of the Houston Chronicle. "The so-called Fair Tax scheme is a blatant attempt by the wealthy to reduce their tax payments. I call it the 'unfair tax,' as it will tax consumption rather than income. Those in the lower- to middle-income brackets usually spend most all of their income on necessities and can't save. They would be taxed on practically 100 percent of their income. Retirees, whose income may require them to pay no taxes, would end up paying taxes on all of the money they spend, which would greatly reduce their purchasing power.
'What's fair about that?'
"On the other hand, those who make more than they spend, and indeed those whose incomes greatly exceed their expenditures, would pay taxes on significantly less of their incomes, proportionally. What's fair about that? In fact it is a total reversal of the graduated tax system that we now have where we pay taxes based on our ability to pay. Our current system is certainly flawed and needs major overhauling, but it is still the fairest method of taxation.
"Let's fix the system we have rather than shifting the tax burden to lower-income Americans."
I've heard this argument before. It doesn't hold water. I believe that junking the current tax system — in its entirety — would create a modestly graduated tax system with a very broad base, consumption. By replacing both the income tax and the employment tax (among others) with a single sales tax, we would accomplish these good things:
•Eliminate the fastest-growing and most regressive tax in our lifetime, the employment tax.
•Massively broaden the tax base from only some income to all consumption.
•Eliminate the corporate income tax and the entrenched corrupting lobbies that it has engendered.
•Make visible, for the first time, the size of our collective tax burden.
•Save the incredible amount of time and money wasted on tax planning and scheming.
•Create a path for dealing with the unfunded liabilities of Social Security by increasing the tax base that supports it.
•End the biannual festival of finger-pointing and envy that has become the hallmark of every election cycle.
•Remove the embedded expense wedge that reduces the competitive position of American-made goods.
The Fair Tax proposal calls for giving all households a "pre-bate" of what they would pay in sales taxes for the necessities of life. The pre-bate would be paid to households monthly, eliminating the burden of taxes on our poorest families. Because of the pre-bate, the new tax would amount to a graduated tax. The argument that poor people save little and rich people save much is a red herring because it ignores two realities.
Benefit is consumption
First, the only benefit from having money is what we can consume with it. If you earn money that is not spent, you are deriving no immediate benefit from the money and shouldn't pay taxes on it. As long as the money not spent is used in our economy, it is providing benefits to everyone in the form of new investment, new jobs and working capital.
Second, many people who are rich or well-off spend more than their income on consumption because they are spending a portion of their capital. Some of that capital would not be taxed at all in the current system. The portion that was capital gain would be taxed at only 15 percent. With the Fair Tax, the very rich would pay taxes on all consumption. This includes mega yachts, wine cellars, and much other consumption that is taxed lightly or not at all. Instead, they would pay at the higher sales tax rate.
Right now our entire tax system is stacked against the young. The burden is getting worse, not better. It is possible that some older people would pay more in taxes than they do under the current system. That would only happen, however, if they had significant assets that they spent on consumption. In that case, the sales tax would be highly progressive. It would tax those with assets that were used for consumption. It would not tax those who had no assets to use for consumption.
The only people who should fear the Fair Tax are the politicians, who would lose their tools for extortion. Most public polls show that more than 50 percent of the voting public — left, right and middle — favor a radical reform of our tax system. So let's take a poll. Send me an e-mail at scott@scottburns.com.
Put "Keep it the way it is" in the subject line if you like our current tax system. Put "Go for the Fair Tax" if you'd like to see broad reform. I'll report the results in the future.
Questions about personal finance may be sent to: SCOTT BURNS, P.O. Box 655237, Dallas, TX 75265; e-mail can be sent to scott@scottburns.com. Burns' Web page is www.scottburns.com.
Bill Cosby
"We Can't Blame White People" by BILL COSBY
"They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English. I can't even talk the way these people talk: Why you ain't, Where you is, What he drive, Where he stay, Where he work, Who you be... I blamed the Kids till I heard the mother talk! And then I heard the father talk.
Everybody knows it's important to speak English except these knuckleheads. You can't be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth. In fact you will never get any kind of job making a decent living. People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around wanting something for free.
The lower economic people are not holding up their end in this deal.
These people are not parenting. They are buying things for kids. $500 sneakers for what? So they can impress some white girl? And they won't spend $200 for Hooked on Phonics. I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit.
Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18 and how come you didn't
know that he had a pistol? And where is the father? Or who is his father?
People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack, isn't that a sign of something? Or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up?
Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up and got all type of needles [piercing] going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; there is no such thing as an African-American and further more they don't know a thing about Africa.
With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all of that crap, and all of them are in jail. Brown or black versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem.
We, the decent Black people have got to take the neighborhood back. People used to be ashamed. Today a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands' -- or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read. We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs. We as black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us.
We (Black and White People)have to start holding each other to a higher standard. We cannot blame the white people any longer."
"They're standing on the corner and they can't speak English. I can't even talk the way these people talk: Why you ain't, Where you is, What he drive, Where he stay, Where he work, Who you be... I blamed the Kids till I heard the mother talk! And then I heard the father talk.
Everybody knows it's important to speak English except these knuckleheads. You can't be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth. In fact you will never get any kind of job making a decent living. People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around wanting something for free.
The lower economic people are not holding up their end in this deal.
These people are not parenting. They are buying things for kids. $500 sneakers for what? So they can impress some white girl? And they won't spend $200 for Hooked on Phonics. I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit.
Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18 and how come you didn't
know that he had a pistol? And where is the father? Or who is his father?
People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack, isn't that a sign of something? Or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up?
Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up and got all type of needles [piercing] going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; there is no such thing as an African-American and further more they don't know a thing about Africa.
With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all of that crap, and all of them are in jail. Brown or black versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem.
We, the decent Black people have got to take the neighborhood back. People used to be ashamed. Today a woman has eight children with eight different 'husbands' -- or men or whatever you call them now. We have millionaire football players who cannot read. We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs. We as black folks have to do a better job. Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us.
We (Black and White People)have to start holding each other to a higher standard. We cannot blame the white people any longer."
What If Iraq Works?
July 31, 2008
What If Iraq Works? There could be a promising future there.
By Victor Davis Hanson
There is a growing confidence among officers, diplomats, and politicians that a constitutional Iraq is going to make it. We don't hear much anymore of trisecting the country, much less pulling all American troops out in defeat.
Critics of the war now argue that a victory in Iraq was not worth the costs, not that victory was always impossible. The worst terrorist leaders, like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Muqtada al-Sadr, are either dead or in hiding.
The 2007 surge, the Anbar Awakening of tribal sheiks against al-Qaeda, the change to counterinsurgency tactics, the vast increase in the size and competence of the Iraqi Security Forces, the sheer number of enemy jihadists killed between 2003 and 2008, the unexpected political savvy of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and the magnetic leadership of Gen. David Petraeus have all contributed to a radically improved Iraq.
Pundits and politicians - especially presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama - are readjusting their positions to reflect the new undeniable realities on the ground in Iraq.
The additional five combat brigades that surged into Iraq in 2007 are already redeployed out of the country. American soldiers are incrementally turning province after province over to the Iraqi Security Forces, and planning careful but steady withdrawals for 2009.
Violence is way down. American military fatalities in Iraq for July, as of Tuesday, were the lowest monthly losses since May 2003. The Iraq theater may soon mirror other deployments in the Balkans, Europe, and Asia, in which casualties are largely non-combat-related.
Since overseas troops have to be billeted, fed, and equipped somewhere - whether in Germany, Okinawa, or Iraq - the material costs of deployment in Iraq may soon likewise approximate those of other theaters. Anger over the costs of the "war" could soon be simply part of a wider debate over the need for, and expense of, maintaining a large number of American troops anywhere abroad.
For over four years, war critics insisted that we took our eye off Afghanistan, empowered Iran, allowed other rogue nations to run amok, and soured our allies while we were mired in an unnecessary war. But how true is all that?
The continuing violence in Afghanistan can be largely attributed to Pakistan, whose tribal wild lands serve as a safe haven for Taliban operations across the border. To the extent the war in Iraq has affected Afghanistan, it may well prove to have been positive for America. Many Afghan and Pakistani jihadists have been killed in Iraq, the war has discredited al-Qaeda, and the U.S. military has gained crucial expertise on tribal counterinsurgency.
Iran in the short term may have been strengthened by a weakened Iraq, U.S. losses, and acrimony over the war. Yet a constitutional Iraq of free Sunnis and Shiites may soon prove as destabilizing to Iran as Iranian subversion once was to Iraq. Nearby American troops, freed from daily fighting in Iraq, should appear to Iran as seasoned rather than exhausted. If Iraq is deemed successful rather than a quagmire, it is also likely that our allies in Europe and the surrounding region will be more likely to pressure Iran.
These shifting realities may explain both the shrill pronouncements emanating from a worried Iran and its desire for diplomatic talks with American representatives.
Other rogue nations - North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba (not to mention al-Qaeda itself) - also do not, for all their bluster, think that or act as if an impotent U.S military is mired in defeat in Iraq.
Meanwhile, surrounding Arab countries may soon strengthen ties with Iraq. After all, military success creates friends as much as defeat loses them. In the past, Iraq's neighbors worried either about Saddam Hussein's aggression or subsequent Shiite/Sunni sectarianism. Now a constitutional Iraq offers them some reassurance that neither Iraqi conventional nor terrorist forces will attack.
None of this means that a secure future for Iraq is certain. After all, there are no constitutional oil-producing states in the Middle East. Instead, we usually see two pathologies: either a state like Iran, where petrodollars are recycled to fund terrorist groups and centrifuges; or the Gulf autocracies where vast profits result in artificial islands, indoor ski runs, and radical Islamic propaganda.
Iraq could still degenerate into one of those models. But for now, Iraq - with an elected government and a free press - is not investing its wealth in subsidizing terrorists outside its borders, establishing fundamentalist madrassas abroad, building centrifuges, or allowing a few thousand royal first cousins to squander its oil profits.
Iraq for the last 20 years was the worst place in the Middle East. The irony is that it may now have the most promising future in the entire region.
What If Iraq Works? There could be a promising future there.
By Victor Davis Hanson
There is a growing confidence among officers, diplomats, and politicians that a constitutional Iraq is going to make it. We don't hear much anymore of trisecting the country, much less pulling all American troops out in defeat.
Critics of the war now argue that a victory in Iraq was not worth the costs, not that victory was always impossible. The worst terrorist leaders, like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Muqtada al-Sadr, are either dead or in hiding.
The 2007 surge, the Anbar Awakening of tribal sheiks against al-Qaeda, the change to counterinsurgency tactics, the vast increase in the size and competence of the Iraqi Security Forces, the sheer number of enemy jihadists killed between 2003 and 2008, the unexpected political savvy of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and the magnetic leadership of Gen. David Petraeus have all contributed to a radically improved Iraq.
Pundits and politicians - especially presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama - are readjusting their positions to reflect the new undeniable realities on the ground in Iraq.
The additional five combat brigades that surged into Iraq in 2007 are already redeployed out of the country. American soldiers are incrementally turning province after province over to the Iraqi Security Forces, and planning careful but steady withdrawals for 2009.
Violence is way down. American military fatalities in Iraq for July, as of Tuesday, were the lowest monthly losses since May 2003. The Iraq theater may soon mirror other deployments in the Balkans, Europe, and Asia, in which casualties are largely non-combat-related.
Since overseas troops have to be billeted, fed, and equipped somewhere - whether in Germany, Okinawa, or Iraq - the material costs of deployment in Iraq may soon likewise approximate those of other theaters. Anger over the costs of the "war" could soon be simply part of a wider debate over the need for, and expense of, maintaining a large number of American troops anywhere abroad.
For over four years, war critics insisted that we took our eye off Afghanistan, empowered Iran, allowed other rogue nations to run amok, and soured our allies while we were mired in an unnecessary war. But how true is all that?
The continuing violence in Afghanistan can be largely attributed to Pakistan, whose tribal wild lands serve as a safe haven for Taliban operations across the border. To the extent the war in Iraq has affected Afghanistan, it may well prove to have been positive for America. Many Afghan and Pakistani jihadists have been killed in Iraq, the war has discredited al-Qaeda, and the U.S. military has gained crucial expertise on tribal counterinsurgency.
Iran in the short term may have been strengthened by a weakened Iraq, U.S. losses, and acrimony over the war. Yet a constitutional Iraq of free Sunnis and Shiites may soon prove as destabilizing to Iran as Iranian subversion once was to Iraq. Nearby American troops, freed from daily fighting in Iraq, should appear to Iran as seasoned rather than exhausted. If Iraq is deemed successful rather than a quagmire, it is also likely that our allies in Europe and the surrounding region will be more likely to pressure Iran.
These shifting realities may explain both the shrill pronouncements emanating from a worried Iran and its desire for diplomatic talks with American representatives.
Other rogue nations - North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba (not to mention al-Qaeda itself) - also do not, for all their bluster, think that or act as if an impotent U.S military is mired in defeat in Iraq.
Meanwhile, surrounding Arab countries may soon strengthen ties with Iraq. After all, military success creates friends as much as defeat loses them. In the past, Iraq's neighbors worried either about Saddam Hussein's aggression or subsequent Shiite/Sunni sectarianism. Now a constitutional Iraq offers them some reassurance that neither Iraqi conventional nor terrorist forces will attack.
None of this means that a secure future for Iraq is certain. After all, there are no constitutional oil-producing states in the Middle East. Instead, we usually see two pathologies: either a state like Iran, where petrodollars are recycled to fund terrorist groups and centrifuges; or the Gulf autocracies where vast profits result in artificial islands, indoor ski runs, and radical Islamic propaganda.
Iraq could still degenerate into one of those models. But for now, Iraq - with an elected government and a free press - is not investing its wealth in subsidizing terrorists outside its borders, establishing fundamentalist madrassas abroad, building centrifuges, or allowing a few thousand royal first cousins to squander its oil profits.
Iraq for the last 20 years was the worst place in the Middle East. The irony is that it may now have the most promising future in the entire region.
Mostly Contemporary Quotes
"The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all." --John F. Kennedy
"Men often get the reputation of being stubborn merely because they are everlastingly right." --Woodrow Wilson
“What our country deserves from everyone who enjoys its fruits and freedoms is a little more gratitude—and a lot less greed.”- Michelle Malkin
"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time a tremendous whack." --Winston Churchill
"How can we pretend to be serious about protecting our borders when prominent politicians so casually dismiss illegal activity? How can we claim to be fighting the war on terrorism on all fronts when we are unwilling to enforce immigration laws?" --David Limbaugh
"It is a wise man who said that there is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals." --Felix Frankfurter
"Democrats will trample over a thousand poor people to throw a rock at a rich man." --Tom Adkins of "The Common Conservative," on the Bush tax-cut plan.
“Liberal compassion has been mugged by reality.”- Michael Novak
“Politicians never accuse you of ‘greed’ for wanting other people’s money—only for wanting to keep your own money.”- Joseph Sobran
“You can’t get rid of poverty by giving people money.”- P.J. O’Rourke
“Freedom plus accountability equals academic excellence.”- Janet Parshall
“Illegal immigration benefits America the way treason enhances national security.”- Don Feder
"A man who thinks of himself as belonging to a particular national group in America has not yet become an American." --Woodrow Wilson
Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; genius will not; education will not. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.- Calvin Coolidge
"Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... [W]e have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." —Theodore Roosevelt
There can be no fifty-fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here for only 100 percent Americanism, only those who are Americans and nothing else.- Theodore Roosevelt
Of all ignorance, the ignorance of the educated is the most dangerous. Not only are educated people likely to have more influence, they are the last people to suspect that they don't know what they are talking about when they go outside their narrow fields.—Thomas Sowell
“You cannot claim both full equality and special dispensation." --William Raspberry
"If a person is utterly ignorant about matters of public policy, then he or she has a solemn obligation to refrain from voting. The percentage of people who fall into the utterly ignorant category is estimated to be about 25 percent of eligible voters." --Mona Charen
Black children don't need politicians of any color who claim to hold the keys to their future. They need parents who know their names. Two of them." —Star Parker
It is time for black children to stop hearing that they can't make it, and this is exactly what they are hearing from Democrats. ... It's time for blacks to be more concerned with what is going on in their own house than having a Democrat in the White House." --Star Parker
"[M]ark my words, [Saddam] will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them... Iraq [is] a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity... Some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal." —Bill Clinton (1998), who—according to senior Democrats on Capitol Hill and the NY Times "World Can't Wait" crowd—must have been "falsifying intelligence"...
"Men often get the reputation of being stubborn merely because they are everlastingly right." --Woodrow Wilson
“What our country deserves from everyone who enjoys its fruits and freedoms is a little more gratitude—and a lot less greed.”- Michelle Malkin
"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time a tremendous whack." --Winston Churchill
"How can we pretend to be serious about protecting our borders when prominent politicians so casually dismiss illegal activity? How can we claim to be fighting the war on terrorism on all fronts when we are unwilling to enforce immigration laws?" --David Limbaugh
"It is a wise man who said that there is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals." --Felix Frankfurter
"Democrats will trample over a thousand poor people to throw a rock at a rich man." --Tom Adkins of "The Common Conservative," on the Bush tax-cut plan.
“Liberal compassion has been mugged by reality.”- Michael Novak
“Politicians never accuse you of ‘greed’ for wanting other people’s money—only for wanting to keep your own money.”- Joseph Sobran
“You can’t get rid of poverty by giving people money.”- P.J. O’Rourke
“Freedom plus accountability equals academic excellence.”- Janet Parshall
“Illegal immigration benefits America the way treason enhances national security.”- Don Feder
"A man who thinks of himself as belonging to a particular national group in America has not yet become an American." --Woodrow Wilson
Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; genius will not; education will not. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.- Calvin Coolidge
"Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... [W]e have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." —Theodore Roosevelt
There can be no fifty-fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here for only 100 percent Americanism, only those who are Americans and nothing else.- Theodore Roosevelt
Of all ignorance, the ignorance of the educated is the most dangerous. Not only are educated people likely to have more influence, they are the last people to suspect that they don't know what they are talking about when they go outside their narrow fields.—Thomas Sowell
“You cannot claim both full equality and special dispensation." --William Raspberry
"If a person is utterly ignorant about matters of public policy, then he or she has a solemn obligation to refrain from voting. The percentage of people who fall into the utterly ignorant category is estimated to be about 25 percent of eligible voters." --Mona Charen
Black children don't need politicians of any color who claim to hold the keys to their future. They need parents who know their names. Two of them." —Star Parker
It is time for black children to stop hearing that they can't make it, and this is exactly what they are hearing from Democrats. ... It's time for blacks to be more concerned with what is going on in their own house than having a Democrat in the White House." --Star Parker
"[M]ark my words, [Saddam] will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them... Iraq [is] a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity... Some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal." —Bill Clinton (1998), who—according to senior Democrats on Capitol Hill and the NY Times "World Can't Wait" crowd—must have been "falsifying intelligence"...
Poli Sci Definitions
Political Science for Dummies
DEMOCRATIC
You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
You feel guilty for being successful.
REPUBLICANISM
You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
So?
SOCIALIST
You have two cows.
The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.
You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.
COMMUNIST
You have two cows.
The government seizes both and provides you with milk.
You wait in line for hours to get it.
It is expensive and sour.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE
You have two cows.
You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.
BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE
You have two cows.
Under the new farm program the government pays you to shoot one, milk the other, and then pours the milk down the drain.
AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one.
You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses.
Your stock goes up.
FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike because you want three cows.
You go to lunch and drink wine.
Life is good.
JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains.
Most are at the top of their class at cow school.
GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You engineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour.
Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.
ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows but you don't know where they are.
While ambling around, you see a beautiful woman.
You break for lunch.
Life is good.
RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have some vodka.
You count them and learn you have five cows.
You have some more vodka.
You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.
The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really have.
TALIBAN CORPORATION
You have all the cows inAfghanistan, which are two.
You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's private parts.
You get a $40 million grant from the US government to find alternatives to milk production but use the money to buy weapons.
IRAQI CORPORATION
You have two cows.
They go into hiding.
They send radio tapes of their mooing.
POLISH CORPORATION
You have two bulls.
Employees are regularly maimed and killed attempting to milk them.
BELGIAN CORPORATION
You have one cow.
The cow is schizophrenic.
Sometimes the cow thinks he's French, other times he's Flemish.
The Flemish cow won't share with the French cow.
The French cow wants control of the Flemish cow's milk.
The cow asks permission to be cut in half.
The cow dies happy.
FLORIDA CORPORATION
You have a black cow and a brown cow.
Everyone votes for the best looking one.
Some of the people who actually like the brown one best accidentally vote for the black one.
Some people vote for both.
Some people vote for neither.
Some people can't figure out how to vote at all.
Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which one you think is the best-looking cow.
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
You have millions of cows.
They make real California cheese.
Only five speak English.
Most are illegal.
Arnold likes the ones with the big udders.
DEMOCRATIC
You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
You feel guilty for being successful.
REPUBLICANISM
You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
So?
SOCIALIST
You have two cows.
The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.
You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.
COMMUNIST
You have two cows.
The government seizes both and provides you with milk.
You wait in line for hours to get it.
It is expensive and sour.
CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE
You have two cows.
You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.
BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE
You have two cows.
Under the new farm program the government pays you to shoot one, milk the other, and then pours the milk down the drain.
AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one.
You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses.
Your stock goes up.
FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike because you want three cows.
You go to lunch and drink wine.
Life is good.
JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains.
Most are at the top of their class at cow school.
GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You engineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour.
Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.
ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows but you don't know where they are.
While ambling around, you see a beautiful woman.
You break for lunch.
Life is good.
RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have some vodka.
You count them and learn you have five cows.
You have some more vodka.
You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.
The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really have.
TALIBAN CORPORATION
You have all the cows inAfghanistan, which are two.
You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's private parts.
You get a $40 million grant from the US government to find alternatives to milk production but use the money to buy weapons.
IRAQI CORPORATION
You have two cows.
They go into hiding.
They send radio tapes of their mooing.
POLISH CORPORATION
You have two bulls.
Employees are regularly maimed and killed attempting to milk them.
BELGIAN CORPORATION
You have one cow.
The cow is schizophrenic.
Sometimes the cow thinks he's French, other times he's Flemish.
The Flemish cow won't share with the French cow.
The French cow wants control of the Flemish cow's milk.
The cow asks permission to be cut in half.
The cow dies happy.
FLORIDA CORPORATION
You have a black cow and a brown cow.
Everyone votes for the best looking one.
Some of the people who actually like the brown one best accidentally vote for the black one.
Some people vote for both.
Some people vote for neither.
Some people can't figure out how to vote at all.
Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which one you think is the best-looking cow.
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
You have millions of cows.
They make real California cheese.
Only five speak English.
Most are illegal.
Arnold likes the ones with the big udders.
Quiz-Not Mine
I decided this morning that I was going to develop my own single-item IQ exam. But, after only a few minutes, I started having trouble deciding which question to use on my exam. There are so many good candidates for inclusion. For example:
1. Do you think that O.J. Simpson was framed?
2. Do you think that professional wrestling is real?
3. Do you think that the first moon landing was fake?
4. Do you think that Osama bin Laden wants George W. Bush to be re-elected because he’s afraid of John Kerry?
5. Do you think that Al Gore invented the internet?
6. Would you let your pre-teenage boy spend the night with Michael Jackson?
7. Have you ever made a contribution to PETA?
8. Do you think that Richard Simmons is straight?
9. Do you think that women should adopt a special diet to avoid prostate cancer?
10. Have you ever made a contribution to Benny Hinn?
11. Do bisexuals have male and female sex organs?
12. Is “innuendo” an Italian term for suppository?
13. Are you more concerned about saving a convicted murderer than an unborn child?
14. Would you support an abortion of an unborn baby while protesting animal abortion?
15. Do you think that Bill Clinton uses Viagra?
16. Do you think that Chris Matthews has good communication skills and respects women?
17. Would you favor the execution of a convicted female killer while she was eight months pregnant?
18. Have you ever asked someone where the “any” key is located on your computer keyboard?
19. Have you ever nodded during a speech by Jesse Jackson?
20. If your roommate stole your bong would you call the police?
21. Have you ever told a waitress that your sushi was undercooked?
22. Do you think that masturbation should be taught in our public schools?
23. Do you think that Pee Wee Herman should be allowed to teach in our public schools?
24. Do you think that the words “b****” and “ho” should be used to avoid cultural bias in IQ testing?
25. Have you ever watched a beautiful sunset and thought “hmm, science has clearly established that we all evolved from primordial soup.”
Feel free to use any of these questions the next time you are confronted with a suspected idiot in a social situation. In fact, feel free to use them all. Just a single “yes” will tell you all you need to know. And, if you don’t like my opinion, just hit any key to escape this editorial. You know where the “any” key is, don’t you?
1. Do you think that O.J. Simpson was framed?
2. Do you think that professional wrestling is real?
3. Do you think that the first moon landing was fake?
4. Do you think that Osama bin Laden wants George W. Bush to be re-elected because he’s afraid of John Kerry?
5. Do you think that Al Gore invented the internet?
6. Would you let your pre-teenage boy spend the night with Michael Jackson?
7. Have you ever made a contribution to PETA?
8. Do you think that Richard Simmons is straight?
9. Do you think that women should adopt a special diet to avoid prostate cancer?
10. Have you ever made a contribution to Benny Hinn?
11. Do bisexuals have male and female sex organs?
12. Is “innuendo” an Italian term for suppository?
13. Are you more concerned about saving a convicted murderer than an unborn child?
14. Would you support an abortion of an unborn baby while protesting animal abortion?
15. Do you think that Bill Clinton uses Viagra?
16. Do you think that Chris Matthews has good communication skills and respects women?
17. Would you favor the execution of a convicted female killer while she was eight months pregnant?
18. Have you ever asked someone where the “any” key is located on your computer keyboard?
19. Have you ever nodded during a speech by Jesse Jackson?
20. If your roommate stole your bong would you call the police?
21. Have you ever told a waitress that your sushi was undercooked?
22. Do you think that masturbation should be taught in our public schools?
23. Do you think that Pee Wee Herman should be allowed to teach in our public schools?
24. Do you think that the words “b****” and “ho” should be used to avoid cultural bias in IQ testing?
25. Have you ever watched a beautiful sunset and thought “hmm, science has clearly established that we all evolved from primordial soup.”
Feel free to use any of these questions the next time you are confronted with a suspected idiot in a social situation. In fact, feel free to use them all. Just a single “yes” will tell you all you need to know. And, if you don’t like my opinion, just hit any key to escape this editorial. You know where the “any” key is, don’t you?
Dennis Miller Interview
The Dennis Miller interview
By JEFFREY RESSNER | 8/10/08 12:29 PM EST
"I view terrorists as really aggressive hecklers that we occasionally have to shut up." - Dennis Miller
Dennis Miller has been a force on the comedy scene ever since anchoring Weekend Update news segments during his Saturday Night Live stint from 1985 to 1991. After SNL, Miller moved on to a number of different gigs — hosting shows on HBO and CNBC, sitting in the announcer’s box as a Monday Night Football commentator and, since last year, taking over the (mostly) AM airwaves where he covers culture, current events and politics on a talk radio show for three hours every day.
Miller has become increasingly political on stage since Sept. 11, 2001, and has also incorporated his conservative streak into his public image, making him a favorite on the GOP’s rubber chicken circuit as well as on the Fox News Channel, where he appears frequently on controversial commentator Bill O’Reilly’s top-rated program. (Full disclosure: Miller often has Politico reporters and editors on his radio show as guests; however, this writer has never personally spoken with him before.)
How would you describe your political beliefs: Republican? Independent? Libertarian?
Well, I’d say it’s eclectic pragmatism at some point. I’m a moderate in some degree because I have wildly swinging opinions but through some sort of ideological feng shui they end up in the middle. Some swing far to the left, others to the far right. I’m for the war, but I’m also for gay marriage. I don’t care if two folks with the same genitalia want to get hitched, I just don’t want some a—hole from another country coming over here and blowing up their wedding to make a political statement.
A lot of popular comedians seem to be conservative: Drew Carey, Adam Sandler. And SNL creator Lorne Michaels has contributed to the McCain campaign. Why do you think many comics tilt this way, while liberals seem to dominate the film and TV business?
We’ve been heckled. And I view terrorists as really aggressive hecklers that we occasionally have to shut up. For the good of the show, they have to be silenced [laughs], dispatched with extreme prejudice, as we say in the trade. There’s pragmatism in stand-up comedy — it’s really darwinian, it’s the Serengeti Plain, you exist from moment to moment, living from joke to joke. If you’re an impressionist you can turn around and nobody is really going to boo; singers have the trappings of the song. Comedians are out there foraging for the truffle that is the laugh and it makes us pragmatic.
How would you describe support for John McCain in Hollywood?
It’s broader than you think. Listen, John McCain, by putting his name at the other end of a hyphen from Russ Feingold, has at least tried to reach across the aisle. Barack Obama is located nowhere near the end of the aisle — he’s way far out on the left. He makes Bernie Sanders look like Curtis LeMay. So I think this time around, at least, it’s much more easier to come out as a conservative or a moderate or at least pragmatic because otherwise the guy you’d have to vote for has the most liberal voting record in the Senate. And some people aren’t for that right now. He’s a 47-year-old nice enough guy who is reflexively liberal and wants to get Chatty Cathy with bad guys.
In just the past few minutes you’ve referenced obscure figures ranging from a '60s-era general to a vintage talking doll. Given your audience on conservative talk radio, are you too hip for the room?
I never signed up for anything called “conservative talk radio.” I’m on Westwood One, and my boss Norm Pattiz is a liberal. I’m just on talk radio. I don’t think I’m too hip for the room at all. I’ve got 194 stations after just 16 months, which I’m told is good, and my mind is boggled at just how wise and funny my callers have been. On occasion I’ll get someone who is off the grid and I’ll feel like I’m on the phone with [Ted] Kaczynski, but for the most part it’s a pretty urbane crowd. I don’t think I’m too hip for the room. People always say ‘it’s so eclectic,’ but I’m making references to the Jetsons’ robot maid — not exactly Ted Cooley or Bucky Fuller.
Who’s your biggest radio influence: Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern?
I love Limbaugh. I don’t agree with him on everything. There are days when something gets shot up and he’s on with gun rights [advocates] and it seems awkward to me. But his broadcasting skills are Garroway-esque. Now that I do a show and see the formatics involved, I’m enamored of him. I don’t listen to Howard. I’m usually on the air in the morning and, when I wasn’t, my job had me working at night and I would often sleep in. I did Howard’s show a few times several years ago, but I don’t listen to it.
It seems as though conservatives are starting to make more inroads in Hollywood. David Zucker has a right-wing comedy coming out soon, then there’s that group called “Friends of Abe” that meets to discuss politics. ...
I called [actor Gary] Sinese yesterday and asked him to please get me an invite to the next Friends of Abe thing. It sounds like the new Algonquin Club to me. The idea of closeted conservatives in Hollywood ... . It might be funny to see who’s over there. I’m surprised that [producer Jerry] Bruckheimer put his name on a John McCain fundraiser [invitation], not because McCain is that radical, but when you’re in the ticket-selling business it does take some balls [to come out as a conservative], so good for him.
Have your political beliefs caused any rifts among your friends or colleagues?
People think the D or the R after your name tells you everything nowadays; I think it tells you a minimal amount. How many times do you go to the movies with a loved one or a dear friend and you walk out shocked at their reaction to the film: they loved it and you hated it, or vice versa. That’s politics. I just see it one way and they see it another. If occasionally I have to hear Rob Reiner call me ‘naïve,’ well, somehow you soldier on, put one foot in front of the other, tuck it into the small of Tenzing Norgay III’s back and keep moving to the summit.
On your Internet Movie Data Base profile page, there’s a photo of you with George Clooney. Are you guys friends?
Oh, I’ve met George backstage at a couple of awards shows and that’s the extent of it. I find him to be a hail-fellow-well-met and I liked his director chops. I’m not one of those people who thought re-telling that story ["Good Night and Good Luck," about the blacklist and Edward R. Murrow] is brave. To go against Roy Cohn and [Joseph] McCarthy — that’s like T-ball to me. But I thought it was well made and I loved the look of it. I loved his [Chuck] Barris film [“Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"]. And he’s an amiable bloke when you’re with him. That said, I don’t think we agree on much but he seems like a cool guy.
What do you think about the direction the McCain campaign is taking now: the whole ‘celebrity’ attack and the ad comparing Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears?
That ad played better for me without the two insert shots of the girls. When they come up on the first shot of the girl, the narrator says ‘He is a worldwide celebrity’ so the editing seemed clunky to me. I’ll be honest with you — I thought the ad seemed a little square. It seemed like an old guy trying to hip it up and that can be dangerous — the next thing you know, you’re Ted Danson coming out of the cab in blackface at the Friar’s Club lunch.
You’re still a strong supporter of President Bush. If he’s such a great president, why are his popularity ratings so low and the “wrong track” numbers for America so high?
I don’t know, and he doesn’t know, either. I’m enamored with him because he doesn’t pay attention to that stuff. Put it this way: if Barack Obama becomes our next president, I’m not going to stand at the shore and start crying that it’s the end of the world. He’ll be my guy, and I think it’s a tough, brutal job right now. All I know is that Bush is up above 2,500 days since there’s been a terror attack on domestic soil. I think that’s an appreciable achievement and some people won’t even give him that. If the next guy continues that string, I’ll be in their corner.
Was there ever a point in your life when you considered running for office?
No. George Allen called me once when he was in charge of Senate procurement something or other and wanted me to run against Barbara Boxer. I remembered when I was in grade school there was always one kid who, two minutes before the end of class when no homework had been assigned, would always raise their hand and remind the teacher. That kid always bugged me. And when I look at Capitol Hill, I see 535 of those kids. I have no interest in joining them.
By JEFFREY RESSNER | 8/10/08 12:29 PM EST
"I view terrorists as really aggressive hecklers that we occasionally have to shut up." - Dennis Miller
Dennis Miller has been a force on the comedy scene ever since anchoring Weekend Update news segments during his Saturday Night Live stint from 1985 to 1991. After SNL, Miller moved on to a number of different gigs — hosting shows on HBO and CNBC, sitting in the announcer’s box as a Monday Night Football commentator and, since last year, taking over the (mostly) AM airwaves where he covers culture, current events and politics on a talk radio show for three hours every day.
Miller has become increasingly political on stage since Sept. 11, 2001, and has also incorporated his conservative streak into his public image, making him a favorite on the GOP’s rubber chicken circuit as well as on the Fox News Channel, where he appears frequently on controversial commentator Bill O’Reilly’s top-rated program. (Full disclosure: Miller often has Politico reporters and editors on his radio show as guests; however, this writer has never personally spoken with him before.)
How would you describe your political beliefs: Republican? Independent? Libertarian?
Well, I’d say it’s eclectic pragmatism at some point. I’m a moderate in some degree because I have wildly swinging opinions but through some sort of ideological feng shui they end up in the middle. Some swing far to the left, others to the far right. I’m for the war, but I’m also for gay marriage. I don’t care if two folks with the same genitalia want to get hitched, I just don’t want some a—hole from another country coming over here and blowing up their wedding to make a political statement.
A lot of popular comedians seem to be conservative: Drew Carey, Adam Sandler. And SNL creator Lorne Michaels has contributed to the McCain campaign. Why do you think many comics tilt this way, while liberals seem to dominate the film and TV business?
We’ve been heckled. And I view terrorists as really aggressive hecklers that we occasionally have to shut up. For the good of the show, they have to be silenced [laughs], dispatched with extreme prejudice, as we say in the trade. There’s pragmatism in stand-up comedy — it’s really darwinian, it’s the Serengeti Plain, you exist from moment to moment, living from joke to joke. If you’re an impressionist you can turn around and nobody is really going to boo; singers have the trappings of the song. Comedians are out there foraging for the truffle that is the laugh and it makes us pragmatic.
How would you describe support for John McCain in Hollywood?
It’s broader than you think. Listen, John McCain, by putting his name at the other end of a hyphen from Russ Feingold, has at least tried to reach across the aisle. Barack Obama is located nowhere near the end of the aisle — he’s way far out on the left. He makes Bernie Sanders look like Curtis LeMay. So I think this time around, at least, it’s much more easier to come out as a conservative or a moderate or at least pragmatic because otherwise the guy you’d have to vote for has the most liberal voting record in the Senate. And some people aren’t for that right now. He’s a 47-year-old nice enough guy who is reflexively liberal and wants to get Chatty Cathy with bad guys.
In just the past few minutes you’ve referenced obscure figures ranging from a '60s-era general to a vintage talking doll. Given your audience on conservative talk radio, are you too hip for the room?
I never signed up for anything called “conservative talk radio.” I’m on Westwood One, and my boss Norm Pattiz is a liberal. I’m just on talk radio. I don’t think I’m too hip for the room at all. I’ve got 194 stations after just 16 months, which I’m told is good, and my mind is boggled at just how wise and funny my callers have been. On occasion I’ll get someone who is off the grid and I’ll feel like I’m on the phone with [Ted] Kaczynski, but for the most part it’s a pretty urbane crowd. I don’t think I’m too hip for the room. People always say ‘it’s so eclectic,’ but I’m making references to the Jetsons’ robot maid — not exactly Ted Cooley or Bucky Fuller.
Who’s your biggest radio influence: Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern?
I love Limbaugh. I don’t agree with him on everything. There are days when something gets shot up and he’s on with gun rights [advocates] and it seems awkward to me. But his broadcasting skills are Garroway-esque. Now that I do a show and see the formatics involved, I’m enamored of him. I don’t listen to Howard. I’m usually on the air in the morning and, when I wasn’t, my job had me working at night and I would often sleep in. I did Howard’s show a few times several years ago, but I don’t listen to it.
It seems as though conservatives are starting to make more inroads in Hollywood. David Zucker has a right-wing comedy coming out soon, then there’s that group called “Friends of Abe” that meets to discuss politics. ...
I called [actor Gary] Sinese yesterday and asked him to please get me an invite to the next Friends of Abe thing. It sounds like the new Algonquin Club to me. The idea of closeted conservatives in Hollywood ... . It might be funny to see who’s over there. I’m surprised that [producer Jerry] Bruckheimer put his name on a John McCain fundraiser [invitation], not because McCain is that radical, but when you’re in the ticket-selling business it does take some balls [to come out as a conservative], so good for him.
Have your political beliefs caused any rifts among your friends or colleagues?
People think the D or the R after your name tells you everything nowadays; I think it tells you a minimal amount. How many times do you go to the movies with a loved one or a dear friend and you walk out shocked at their reaction to the film: they loved it and you hated it, or vice versa. That’s politics. I just see it one way and they see it another. If occasionally I have to hear Rob Reiner call me ‘naïve,’ well, somehow you soldier on, put one foot in front of the other, tuck it into the small of Tenzing Norgay III’s back and keep moving to the summit.
On your Internet Movie Data Base profile page, there’s a photo of you with George Clooney. Are you guys friends?
Oh, I’ve met George backstage at a couple of awards shows and that’s the extent of it. I find him to be a hail-fellow-well-met and I liked his director chops. I’m not one of those people who thought re-telling that story ["Good Night and Good Luck," about the blacklist and Edward R. Murrow] is brave. To go against Roy Cohn and [Joseph] McCarthy — that’s like T-ball to me. But I thought it was well made and I loved the look of it. I loved his [Chuck] Barris film [“Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"]. And he’s an amiable bloke when you’re with him. That said, I don’t think we agree on much but he seems like a cool guy.
What do you think about the direction the McCain campaign is taking now: the whole ‘celebrity’ attack and the ad comparing Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears?
That ad played better for me without the two insert shots of the girls. When they come up on the first shot of the girl, the narrator says ‘He is a worldwide celebrity’ so the editing seemed clunky to me. I’ll be honest with you — I thought the ad seemed a little square. It seemed like an old guy trying to hip it up and that can be dangerous — the next thing you know, you’re Ted Danson coming out of the cab in blackface at the Friar’s Club lunch.
You’re still a strong supporter of President Bush. If he’s such a great president, why are his popularity ratings so low and the “wrong track” numbers for America so high?
I don’t know, and he doesn’t know, either. I’m enamored with him because he doesn’t pay attention to that stuff. Put it this way: if Barack Obama becomes our next president, I’m not going to stand at the shore and start crying that it’s the end of the world. He’ll be my guy, and I think it’s a tough, brutal job right now. All I know is that Bush is up above 2,500 days since there’s been a terror attack on domestic soil. I think that’s an appreciable achievement and some people won’t even give him that. If the next guy continues that string, I’ll be in their corner.
Was there ever a point in your life when you considered running for office?
No. George Allen called me once when he was in charge of Senate procurement something or other and wanted me to run against Barbara Boxer. I remembered when I was in grade school there was always one kid who, two minutes before the end of class when no homework had been assigned, would always raise their hand and remind the teacher. That kid always bugged me. And when I look at Capitol Hill, I see 535 of those kids. I have no interest in joining them.
Fox News
Fox News: Enraging Liberals for 10 Years
By Brian C. Anderson, BRIAN C. ANDERSON is senior editor of City Journal and author of "South Park Conservatives: The Revolt Against Liberal Media Bias." October 4, 2006
FOX NEWS turns 10 this week, and it has every reason to celebrate. Launched by media tycoon Rupert Murdoch and former political consultant Roger Ailes as a refuge for viewers fed up with real or perceived liberal bias elsewhere in the media, Fox is the undisputed ratings champion of cable news. It's been trouncing CNN, MSNBC and CNBC for years, and it sometimes draws a fatter audience share than all its competitors combined, though viewership has slumped a little of late. Pugnacious Bill O'Reilly and conservative tough guy Sean Hannity have become two of the nation's most powerful broadcasters thanks to this kind of ratings pull. Fox is the news media success story of the last decade.
Liberals aren't celebrating the channel's birthday, though. Even before an angry Bill Clinton exploded at "Fox News Sunday" anchor Chris Wallace a couple of weeks ago, accusing him of "a nice little conservative hit job" after getting pressed about his record on fighting Al Qaeda, Democratic pols and advocates have relentlessly attacked the cable network, accusing it of being a Republican propaganda mill. Al Gore has likened Fox to a right-wing "fifth column." Leftist groups, including MoveOn.org, funded the documentary "Outfoxed," which purports to expose the channel's nefarious Republican agenda, and petitioned the Federal Trade Commission to ban Fox's use of its famous "Fair and Balanced" slogan as deceptive advertising.
"When a news outlet is allowed to blur the lines between opinion and journalism and call it 'fair and balanced,' I think it's confusing to consumers of information in this country, and it's dangerous to democracy," fretted an official at Common Cause, one of the organizations joining the petition. Hollywood celebrities never miss an opportunity to bash "Faux News." Comedy Central's witty "Colbert Report" is a nightly satire of the channel and of O'Reilly in particular.
What explains all this hysteria? Success, of course.
The propaganda charge is unfair, at least when it comes to the network's presentation of news. In the 2004 presidential race, Fox pollsters consistently underestimated President Bush's support. In its final preelection poll, Fox had Kerry winning by a couple of points, one of the only polls to show the Democrat on top. I'm not sure a right-wing fifth column would do that.
A recent comprehensive study by UCLA political scientist Tim Groseclose and University of Missouri-Columbia economics professor Jeffrey Milyo found Brit Hume's "Special Report" — Fox's most straightforward news show — more centrist than any of the three major networks' evening newscasts, all of which leaned left.
The program is a model of smart news television.
And although it's true that the network's opinion shows (as opposed to its news shows) are, as they're supposed to be, noisily opinionated, it's equally true that Fox's biggest star, O'Reilly, is no mainstream Republican. He regularly charges the oil companies with price-gouging and attacks big business for squashing the little guy. And who can say what host Greta Van Susteren's politics are? She mostly zeroes in on lurid murder mysteries and scandals.
Liberals troop into and out of the Fox studios every day — some of them, like host Alan Colmes and news analyst Marvin Kalb, affiliated with the channel. There's no doubt, of course, that Fox News is more conservative than CBS or CNN. But, after all, that was its founding mission.
Fox's real ethos is not Republican but anti-elitist — a major reason it connects with so many Americans and annoys so many coastal elites. "There's a whole country that elitists will never acknowledge," Ailes once observed. "What people resent deeply out there are those in the 'blue states' thinking they're smarter."
This anti-elitism shows itself in Fox's pro-U.S. stance in covering the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and its broadcasters' use of terms such as "terrorist" instead of "militant" to refer to … well, terrorists. Since the Vietnam War era, mainstream journalists have tended to see such blunt language and side-taking as unsophisticated, a betrayal of journalistic objectivity.
Another aspect of Fox's anti-elitism: Christians, far from being seen as lunatics or curiosities — as too often is the case in the mainstream media — actually get some respect.
"We regularly have on the Rev. Franklin Graham, Dr. James Dobson and other religious leaders, just as we put on Pat Ireland and Eleanor Clift," Hannity told me a while back. "Most Americans believe in God and have that as their foundation in life. So why shouldn't we have as guests people that they like, respect and want to hear from?"
What really frustrates liberals about Fox, though, is simply that, along with talk radio and the conservative blogosphere, it has helped shatter the left's near-monopoly on news and information. Fox's opinion-driven programming gives conservatives and liberals a chance to get a hearing for their ideas. But Democratic politicians and activists who go on Fox also must defend their views, often against tough questioning, something that happens less often on the networks, where most journalists are left-of-center, survey after survey has shown.
Even more significant, Fox came on the scene a decade ago as a professional news organization that could define and report news as something different from what the elite consensus says it is. To take one of many examples, the corruption of the United Nations' oil-for-food initiative in Iraq, initially downplayed by the mainstream media because of their sympathy for internationalism, was uncovered — deemed newsworthy — on Fox.
All this wouldn't matter if Fox News wasn't so influential. But it is. According to the Pew Research Center, more than 20% of Americans now claim to get news from it, and lots of them (37%) are Democrats or independents. The network's success has also sparked a "Fox effect," leading some competitors to become more open to right-of-center opinions: MSNBC's "Scarborough Country," hosted by former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough, is a prime example. Until a few years ago, Democrats never had to deal with all these mediatized conservatives.
Nothing would please liberals more than to drag the nation back to the days when the New York Times and CBS News determined what was newsworthy. A group of congressional Democrats has warned Fox to end its supposed anti-Democratic bias — or else. Should Democrats retake Congress, an effort to shut down, or at least muzzle, Fox, is far from inconceivable, creepy and illiberal as that sounds.
Something Fox News doubtless is keeping in mind as it pops the champagne corks this week.
By Brian C. Anderson, BRIAN C. ANDERSON is senior editor of City Journal and author of "South Park Conservatives: The Revolt Against Liberal Media Bias." October 4, 2006
FOX NEWS turns 10 this week, and it has every reason to celebrate. Launched by media tycoon Rupert Murdoch and former political consultant Roger Ailes as a refuge for viewers fed up with real or perceived liberal bias elsewhere in the media, Fox is the undisputed ratings champion of cable news. It's been trouncing CNN, MSNBC and CNBC for years, and it sometimes draws a fatter audience share than all its competitors combined, though viewership has slumped a little of late. Pugnacious Bill O'Reilly and conservative tough guy Sean Hannity have become two of the nation's most powerful broadcasters thanks to this kind of ratings pull. Fox is the news media success story of the last decade.
Liberals aren't celebrating the channel's birthday, though. Even before an angry Bill Clinton exploded at "Fox News Sunday" anchor Chris Wallace a couple of weeks ago, accusing him of "a nice little conservative hit job" after getting pressed about his record on fighting Al Qaeda, Democratic pols and advocates have relentlessly attacked the cable network, accusing it of being a Republican propaganda mill. Al Gore has likened Fox to a right-wing "fifth column." Leftist groups, including MoveOn.org, funded the documentary "Outfoxed," which purports to expose the channel's nefarious Republican agenda, and petitioned the Federal Trade Commission to ban Fox's use of its famous "Fair and Balanced" slogan as deceptive advertising.
"When a news outlet is allowed to blur the lines between opinion and journalism and call it 'fair and balanced,' I think it's confusing to consumers of information in this country, and it's dangerous to democracy," fretted an official at Common Cause, one of the organizations joining the petition. Hollywood celebrities never miss an opportunity to bash "Faux News." Comedy Central's witty "Colbert Report" is a nightly satire of the channel and of O'Reilly in particular.
What explains all this hysteria? Success, of course.
The propaganda charge is unfair, at least when it comes to the network's presentation of news. In the 2004 presidential race, Fox pollsters consistently underestimated President Bush's support. In its final preelection poll, Fox had Kerry winning by a couple of points, one of the only polls to show the Democrat on top. I'm not sure a right-wing fifth column would do that.
A recent comprehensive study by UCLA political scientist Tim Groseclose and University of Missouri-Columbia economics professor Jeffrey Milyo found Brit Hume's "Special Report" — Fox's most straightforward news show — more centrist than any of the three major networks' evening newscasts, all of which leaned left.
The program is a model of smart news television.
And although it's true that the network's opinion shows (as opposed to its news shows) are, as they're supposed to be, noisily opinionated, it's equally true that Fox's biggest star, O'Reilly, is no mainstream Republican. He regularly charges the oil companies with price-gouging and attacks big business for squashing the little guy. And who can say what host Greta Van Susteren's politics are? She mostly zeroes in on lurid murder mysteries and scandals.
Liberals troop into and out of the Fox studios every day — some of them, like host Alan Colmes and news analyst Marvin Kalb, affiliated with the channel. There's no doubt, of course, that Fox News is more conservative than CBS or CNN. But, after all, that was its founding mission.
Fox's real ethos is not Republican but anti-elitist — a major reason it connects with so many Americans and annoys so many coastal elites. "There's a whole country that elitists will never acknowledge," Ailes once observed. "What people resent deeply out there are those in the 'blue states' thinking they're smarter."
This anti-elitism shows itself in Fox's pro-U.S. stance in covering the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and its broadcasters' use of terms such as "terrorist" instead of "militant" to refer to … well, terrorists. Since the Vietnam War era, mainstream journalists have tended to see such blunt language and side-taking as unsophisticated, a betrayal of journalistic objectivity.
Another aspect of Fox's anti-elitism: Christians, far from being seen as lunatics or curiosities — as too often is the case in the mainstream media — actually get some respect.
"We regularly have on the Rev. Franklin Graham, Dr. James Dobson and other religious leaders, just as we put on Pat Ireland and Eleanor Clift," Hannity told me a while back. "Most Americans believe in God and have that as their foundation in life. So why shouldn't we have as guests people that they like, respect and want to hear from?"
What really frustrates liberals about Fox, though, is simply that, along with talk radio and the conservative blogosphere, it has helped shatter the left's near-monopoly on news and information. Fox's opinion-driven programming gives conservatives and liberals a chance to get a hearing for their ideas. But Democratic politicians and activists who go on Fox also must defend their views, often against tough questioning, something that happens less often on the networks, where most journalists are left-of-center, survey after survey has shown.
Even more significant, Fox came on the scene a decade ago as a professional news organization that could define and report news as something different from what the elite consensus says it is. To take one of many examples, the corruption of the United Nations' oil-for-food initiative in Iraq, initially downplayed by the mainstream media because of their sympathy for internationalism, was uncovered — deemed newsworthy — on Fox.
All this wouldn't matter if Fox News wasn't so influential. But it is. According to the Pew Research Center, more than 20% of Americans now claim to get news from it, and lots of them (37%) are Democrats or independents. The network's success has also sparked a "Fox effect," leading some competitors to become more open to right-of-center opinions: MSNBC's "Scarborough Country," hosted by former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough, is a prime example. Until a few years ago, Democrats never had to deal with all these mediatized conservatives.
Nothing would please liberals more than to drag the nation back to the days when the New York Times and CBS News determined what was newsworthy. A group of congressional Democrats has warned Fox to end its supposed anti-Democratic bias — or else. Should Democrats retake Congress, an effort to shut down, or at least muzzle, Fox, is far from inconceivable, creepy and illiberal as that sounds.
Something Fox News doubtless is keeping in mind as it pops the champagne corks this week.
Dick Morris on Palin
A STAR IS BORN
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published in the The New York Post on September 4, 2008
With sass and wit, sarcasm and sincerity, courage and strength, Sarah Palin last night showed us a new model of female politician.
Her family stories were genuine and real. Her commitment to special-needs children was moving. Her contempt for special interests was obvious.
And her putdowns of Barack Obama's rhetoric and her praise of John McCain's character and achievements were welcome and well delivered.
Many women look bad when they attack their opponents, too often seeming strident and shrill. But Palin was funny and irreverant, with a biting wit and a joy of combat that was exhilarating to watch.
Sometimes she reminded us of the hockey mom she is. Other times, she was an American Margaret Thatcher - mobilizing humor and biting satire to mock the opposition.
Where Hillary Clinton has but two speeds - full forward and stop - Palin displayed a range of rhetoric, emotion and language that sometimes evoked moving patriotism, at other times hilarious irony - and, frequently, a strong dose of common sense.
If her style in attacking and mocking her opponent was Thatcher-esque, her range of rhetorical style was Rooseveltian. She is, in fact, one of the best public speakers in our politics today.
Now the Democrats are stuck in a trap. They've demeaned, patronized and smeared a woman who's well on her way to becoming very, very popular. Her speech will create legions of fans; the Democratic smears of the last few days will create, for Obama, legions of enemies.
This man who dedicated two years to stopping a woman from being president now has to answer for spending two months stopping one from becoming vice president - a task he hopes to accomplish using women's votes.
Remember: The swing vote in this election are single moms. Just as the soccer moms dominated in 1996 and security moms in 2004, now unmarried women, mostly with children, will determine the outcome of the 2008 race. And they're finding in Sarah Palin an advocate whose life isn't far different from their own and whose priorities mirror theirs'.
As withering in her contempt for the country-club elites of the Republican establishment as for the pandering of the Democrats, Palin stands in stark contrast to the inherited elitism of the Bushes, the Romneys and the Kennedys. She's a woman of the people.
Was this a Republican attacking big oil? Was it the nominee for vice president of a major party who laced into earmarks and lobbyists and PACs? Yes it was - and how refreshing!
In her sincere embrace of her family and her nonjudgmental introduction of her pregnant daughter, Palin won the hearts of many single moms. By evoking life in a modest, middle-class town, she established an empathy with voters akin to what Bill Clinton built when he ate at McDonalds'.
How are the Democrats to live down their assaults on Sarah? How not to seem the enemies of the very voters they have to get?
Strategically, Palin achieved the convention's core goal - to show how McCain is not a clone of George Bush, but a man of the people eager for change and demanding of reforms.
Now the gap between Obama and McCain is not so wide. Now it is clear that they both stand for change.
So now the fear of a naive and untried Obama leading the nation through perilous times at home and abroad can work to drive voters over the narrower synapse and get them to vote for McCain.
Mission accomplished, Sarah.
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published in the The New York Post on September 4, 2008
With sass and wit, sarcasm and sincerity, courage and strength, Sarah Palin last night showed us a new model of female politician.
Her family stories were genuine and real. Her commitment to special-needs children was moving. Her contempt for special interests was obvious.
And her putdowns of Barack Obama's rhetoric and her praise of John McCain's character and achievements were welcome and well delivered.
Many women look bad when they attack their opponents, too often seeming strident and shrill. But Palin was funny and irreverant, with a biting wit and a joy of combat that was exhilarating to watch.
Sometimes she reminded us of the hockey mom she is. Other times, she was an American Margaret Thatcher - mobilizing humor and biting satire to mock the opposition.
Where Hillary Clinton has but two speeds - full forward and stop - Palin displayed a range of rhetoric, emotion and language that sometimes evoked moving patriotism, at other times hilarious irony - and, frequently, a strong dose of common sense.
If her style in attacking and mocking her opponent was Thatcher-esque, her range of rhetorical style was Rooseveltian. She is, in fact, one of the best public speakers in our politics today.
Now the Democrats are stuck in a trap. They've demeaned, patronized and smeared a woman who's well on her way to becoming very, very popular. Her speech will create legions of fans; the Democratic smears of the last few days will create, for Obama, legions of enemies.
This man who dedicated two years to stopping a woman from being president now has to answer for spending two months stopping one from becoming vice president - a task he hopes to accomplish using women's votes.
Remember: The swing vote in this election are single moms. Just as the soccer moms dominated in 1996 and security moms in 2004, now unmarried women, mostly with children, will determine the outcome of the 2008 race. And they're finding in Sarah Palin an advocate whose life isn't far different from their own and whose priorities mirror theirs'.
As withering in her contempt for the country-club elites of the Republican establishment as for the pandering of the Democrats, Palin stands in stark contrast to the inherited elitism of the Bushes, the Romneys and the Kennedys. She's a woman of the people.
Was this a Republican attacking big oil? Was it the nominee for vice president of a major party who laced into earmarks and lobbyists and PACs? Yes it was - and how refreshing!
In her sincere embrace of her family and her nonjudgmental introduction of her pregnant daughter, Palin won the hearts of many single moms. By evoking life in a modest, middle-class town, she established an empathy with voters akin to what Bill Clinton built when he ate at McDonalds'.
How are the Democrats to live down their assaults on Sarah? How not to seem the enemies of the very voters they have to get?
Strategically, Palin achieved the convention's core goal - to show how McCain is not a clone of George Bush, but a man of the people eager for change and demanding of reforms.
Now the gap between Obama and McCain is not so wide. Now it is clear that they both stand for change.
So now the fear of a naive and untried Obama leading the nation through perilous times at home and abroad can work to drive voters over the narrower synapse and get them to vote for McCain.
Mission accomplished, Sarah.
It's the Small Improvements
"What we call little things are merely the causes of great things; they are the beginning, the embryo, and it is the point of departure which, generally speaking, decides the whole future of an existence. One single black speck may be the beginning of a gangrene, of a storm, of a revolution." - Henri Frederic Amiel
"My own idea is that these things are as piffle before the wind." - Daisy Ashford
"Sometimes when I consider what tremendous consequences come from little things. I am tempted to think there are no little things." - Bruce Barton
"Nothing can be done except little by little." - Charles Baudelaire
"Show me a man who cannot bother to do little things and I'll show you a man who cannot be trusted to do big things." - Lawrence D. Bell
"It can be helpful simply to make a written or mental list of the things you do each day. Then give yourself a mental credit for each of them, however small. This will help you focus on what you have done instead of what you haven't gotten around to do. It may sound simplistic, but it works." - David D. Burns
"There is no one giant step that does it. It's a lot of little steps." - Peter A. Cohen
"You'll come to learn a great deal if you study the Insignificant in depth." - Odysseus Elytis
"Human felicity is produced not as much by great pieces of good fortune that seldom happen as by little advantages that occur every day." - Benjamin Franklin
"Great things are done by a series of small things brought together." - Vincent Van Gogh
"Between the great things we cannot do and the small things we will not do, lies the danger that we shall do nothing." - Adolph Monod
"If you take care of the small things, the big things take care of themselves. You can gain more control over your life by paying closer attention to the little things." - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson
“If you cannot do great things, do small things in a great way.” - Napoleon Hill quotes
If we do not maintain justice, justice will not maintain us. - Francis Bacon
Silence is the virtue of fools. - Sir Francis Bacon
It has long been an axiom of mine that the little things are infinitely the most important. - Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan
We must not, in trying to think about how we can make a big difference, ignore the small daily differences we can make which, over time, add up to big differences that we often cannot foresee. - Edelman, Marian Wright
A small leak can sink a great ship. - Franklin, Benjamin
For the person for whom small things do not exist, the great is not great. - Gasset, Jose Ortega Y
All good work is done the way ants do things, little by little. - Hearn, Lafcadio
If you add a little to a little and do this often, soon the little will become great. - Hesiod
I long to accomplish a great and noble task, but it is my chief duty to accomplish small tasks as if they were great and noble. - Keller, Helen
The human tendency to regard little things as important has produced very many great things. - Lichtenberg, Georg C.
Inches make champions. - Lombardi, Vince
It's the little things that make the big things possible. Only close attention to the fine details of any operation makes the operation first class. - Marriott, J. Willard
The person determined to achieve maximum success learns the principle that progress is made one step at a time. A house is built one brick at a time. Football games are won a play at a time. A department store grows bigger one customer at a time. Every big accomplishment is a series of little accomplishments. - Schwartz, David J.
A mountain is composed of tiny grains of earth. The ocean is made up of tiny drops of water. Even so, life is but an endless series of little details, actions, speeches, and thoughts. And the consequences whether good or bad of even the least of them are far-reaching. - Sivananda, Sri Swami
All great things are only a number of small things that have carefully been collected together. - Unknown
Increased QUALITY/PRODUCTIVITY is made up of 1000s of small improvements. Just like Gulliver who was held down by 1000s of threads. Each one doesn't seem to mean much, and in the case of a thread, can be easily broken. But 1000s of them can have a very strong effect. - Unknown
Success in life is founded upon attention to the small things rather than to the large things; to the every day things nearest to us rather than to the things that are remote and uncommon. - Washington, Booker T.
It isn't the big pleasures that count the most; it's making a great deal out of the little ones. - Webster, Jean
It's the little details that are vital. Little things make big things happen. - Wooden, John
"My own idea is that these things are as piffle before the wind." - Daisy Ashford
"Sometimes when I consider what tremendous consequences come from little things. I am tempted to think there are no little things." - Bruce Barton
"Nothing can be done except little by little." - Charles Baudelaire
"Show me a man who cannot bother to do little things and I'll show you a man who cannot be trusted to do big things." - Lawrence D. Bell
"It can be helpful simply to make a written or mental list of the things you do each day. Then give yourself a mental credit for each of them, however small. This will help you focus on what you have done instead of what you haven't gotten around to do. It may sound simplistic, but it works." - David D. Burns
"There is no one giant step that does it. It's a lot of little steps." - Peter A. Cohen
"You'll come to learn a great deal if you study the Insignificant in depth." - Odysseus Elytis
"Human felicity is produced not as much by great pieces of good fortune that seldom happen as by little advantages that occur every day." - Benjamin Franklin
"Great things are done by a series of small things brought together." - Vincent Van Gogh
"Between the great things we cannot do and the small things we will not do, lies the danger that we shall do nothing." - Adolph Monod
"If you take care of the small things, the big things take care of themselves. You can gain more control over your life by paying closer attention to the little things." - Emily Elizabeth Dickinson
“If you cannot do great things, do small things in a great way.” - Napoleon Hill quotes
If we do not maintain justice, justice will not maintain us. - Francis Bacon
Silence is the virtue of fools. - Sir Francis Bacon
It has long been an axiom of mine that the little things are infinitely the most important. - Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan
We must not, in trying to think about how we can make a big difference, ignore the small daily differences we can make which, over time, add up to big differences that we often cannot foresee. - Edelman, Marian Wright
A small leak can sink a great ship. - Franklin, Benjamin
For the person for whom small things do not exist, the great is not great. - Gasset, Jose Ortega Y
All good work is done the way ants do things, little by little. - Hearn, Lafcadio
If you add a little to a little and do this often, soon the little will become great. - Hesiod
I long to accomplish a great and noble task, but it is my chief duty to accomplish small tasks as if they were great and noble. - Keller, Helen
The human tendency to regard little things as important has produced very many great things. - Lichtenberg, Georg C.
Inches make champions. - Lombardi, Vince
It's the little things that make the big things possible. Only close attention to the fine details of any operation makes the operation first class. - Marriott, J. Willard
The person determined to achieve maximum success learns the principle that progress is made one step at a time. A house is built one brick at a time. Football games are won a play at a time. A department store grows bigger one customer at a time. Every big accomplishment is a series of little accomplishments. - Schwartz, David J.
A mountain is composed of tiny grains of earth. The ocean is made up of tiny drops of water. Even so, life is but an endless series of little details, actions, speeches, and thoughts. And the consequences whether good or bad of even the least of them are far-reaching. - Sivananda, Sri Swami
All great things are only a number of small things that have carefully been collected together. - Unknown
Increased QUALITY/PRODUCTIVITY is made up of 1000s of small improvements. Just like Gulliver who was held down by 1000s of threads. Each one doesn't seem to mean much, and in the case of a thread, can be easily broken. But 1000s of them can have a very strong effect. - Unknown
Success in life is founded upon attention to the small things rather than to the large things; to the every day things nearest to us rather than to the things that are remote and uncommon. - Washington, Booker T.
It isn't the big pleasures that count the most; it's making a great deal out of the little ones. - Webster, Jean
It's the little details that are vital. Little things make big things happen. - Wooden, John
Colonel Harry Riley's Note to Congress
33 Senators Voted Against English as America's Official Language on June 6, 2007.
On Wed. 6 June 2007, Colonel Harry Riley, USA, Ret. wrote:
Senators: Your vote against an amendment to the immigration Bill 1348.... to make English America's official language is astounding.
On D-Day, no less, when we honor those that sacrificed in order to secure the bedrock, character and principles of America, I can only surmise your vote reflects a loyalty to illegal aliens. I don't much care where you come from. What your religion is. Whether you're black, white, or some other color...male or female......Democrat, Republican or Independent....... But I do care when you are a United States Senator representing Citizens of America ...and Vote against English as the official language of the United States Your vote reflects Betrayal. Political Surrender. Violates Your Pledge of Allegiance. Dishonors historical principle. Rejects Patriotism. Borders on traitorous action and, in my opinion, makes you unfit to serve as a United States Senator...impeachment... Recall........Or other appropriate action is warranted, or worse.
Four of you voting against English as America's official language are Presidential Candidates: Senator Biden, Senator Clinton, Senator Dodd and Senator Obama.
Four Senators vying to lead America, but won't, or don't, have the courage to cast a vote in favor of English as America's official language when 91% of American citizens want English officially designated as our language.
This is the second time in the last several months this list of Senators have disgraced themselves as 'political Hacks'..... Unworthy as Senators and certainly unqualified to serve as President of the United States. If America is as angry as I am, you will realize a backlash so stunning it will literally 'rock you out of your socks'......... And preferably totally out of the United States Senate.
The entire immigration bill is a farce... Your action only confirms this really isn't about America... it is about self-serving politics......despicable at best. It has been said: 'Never argue with an idiot....They'll drag you down to their level!'
PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID: "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damages morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, quickly tried and hanged."
On Wed. 6 June 2007, Colonel Harry Riley, USA, Ret. wrote:
Senators: Your vote against an amendment to the immigration Bill 1348.... to make English America's official language is astounding.
On D-Day, no less, when we honor those that sacrificed in order to secure the bedrock, character and principles of America, I can only surmise your vote reflects a loyalty to illegal aliens. I don't much care where you come from. What your religion is. Whether you're black, white, or some other color...male or female......Democrat, Republican or Independent....... But I do care when you are a United States Senator representing Citizens of America ...and Vote against English as the official language of the United States Your vote reflects Betrayal. Political Surrender. Violates Your Pledge of Allegiance. Dishonors historical principle. Rejects Patriotism. Borders on traitorous action and, in my opinion, makes you unfit to serve as a United States Senator...impeachment... Recall........Or other appropriate action is warranted, or worse.
Four of you voting against English as America's official language are Presidential Candidates: Senator Biden, Senator Clinton, Senator Dodd and Senator Obama.
Four Senators vying to lead America, but won't, or don't, have the courage to cast a vote in favor of English as America's official language when 91% of American citizens want English officially designated as our language.
This is the second time in the last several months this list of Senators have disgraced themselves as 'political Hacks'..... Unworthy as Senators and certainly unqualified to serve as President of the United States. If America is as angry as I am, you will realize a backlash so stunning it will literally 'rock you out of your socks'......... And preferably totally out of the United States Senate.
The entire immigration bill is a farce... Your action only confirms this really isn't about America... it is about self-serving politics......despicable at best. It has been said: 'Never argue with an idiot....They'll drag you down to their level!'
PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID: "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damages morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, quickly tried and hanged."
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Turkey Facts
Churches can’t own property
Wants to join EU for $, not to assimilate to Western culture
Treated Pope poorly during his last visit
Islamic govt., Secular country--Istanbul- modern, Islamic
Catholic priest shot in church by Islamic radical
50 million Muslims
Acton.org
Wants to join EU for $, not to assimilate to Western culture
Treated Pope poorly during his last visit
Islamic govt., Secular country--Istanbul- modern, Islamic
Catholic priest shot in church by Islamic radical
50 million Muslims
Acton.org
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Hollywood Pushes Lesbianism
What follows is a crude list of movies that have a lesbian scene in them for no reason. This is not to say that I personally mind it. I am no prude. It just bothers me because it is a gratuitous and underhanded attempt by sneaky film makers to push these images intentionally.
Blood Hunter, End of Days, Hostel II, Starsky and Hutch, 300, The Fast and the Furious, The Haunting, Day of the Dead, Return to the House on Haunted Hill, Elektra, Chasing Amy, Romeo Must Die, Basic Instinct, American Psycho, Tootsie, Showgirls, From Hell, Frida, Mia, Ghosts of Mars, Jerry Maguire, Zoolander, Bordello of Blood, and some movie I can't remember that came out last year where the guys fiance' falls in love with his sister and takes advantage of her when she's drunk.
Blood Hunter, End of Days, Hostel II, Starsky and Hutch, 300, The Fast and the Furious, The Haunting, Day of the Dead, Return to the House on Haunted Hill, Elektra, Chasing Amy, Romeo Must Die, Basic Instinct, American Psycho, Tootsie, Showgirls, From Hell, Frida, Mia, Ghosts of Mars, Jerry Maguire, Zoolander, Bordello of Blood, and some movie I can't remember that came out last year where the guys fiance' falls in love with his sister and takes advantage of her when she's drunk.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Racism
Racism is a touchy, touchy subject so first I'd like to list my credentials. When I was 16 years old I dated a beautiful black girl one year below me at a very tough high school. Riverdale High in Fort Myers was, at the time, inhabited by almost 2000 students most of which were either redneck hillbillies or black kids from the inner city. At lunch time, the black kids would all sit together on the floor against the wall while the white kids ate at the tables. I was the sole white face sitting on the floor among the crowd of black kids.
Anyway, when I dated this girl, no one liked it. I didn't care. I was crazy about her. I lost my virginity at this time. Previous to her I dated a Hispanic girl, Lara Fornea, who I loved very much. I remember my best friend at the time telling me that he would no longer be my friend if I dated her. I did anyway. He later said he respected me for that and apologized. Since those days, I dated maybe three Caucasian women. All the rest were minorities, and there were many.
Many of my heroes are minorities including people such as Prince, who I have loved since I was 12 years old, Bruce Lee who I have the utmost respect for and have followed closely for about 15 years now, Supreme Court Justic Clarence Thomas is a hero of mine because of what he has had to endure, and I have said over and over again that I would vote for Condoleezza Rice for President if she would only run because I think she is a genius and an honorable person. The same goes for Linda Chavez. Dinesh D'Souza is my favorite book author, and Michelle Malkin is my favorite blogger and columnist.
In pharmacy school my closest friends were all minorities. I actually had only one close Caucasian friend, the rest were only schoolmates and acquaintances really. My click was almost all Asian, and two of my closest friends were black, one was from Nigeria. I am currently married to an alluring woman of Chinese and Vietnamese decent, who received her doctorate along with me, and adore her two little girls.
One of the best pharmacy technicians I ever had was a great kid from Cuba named Osniel who I am still trying to hire in my current pharmacy to this day. I have friends at my place of work, Ana in particular, who I like very much. They are wonderful people.
Having said that, I have a real problem with some minorities in this country. I think illegal immigration is a larger threat to America than terrorism is (drugs, violent crime, bankrupt hospital system, welfare fraud, etc.). I think too many Hispanics (legal and illegal) have a harmful value system and culture, and I have a real problem with blacks committing a vastly disproportionate amount of crime in this country. Neither of these two groups hold dear a culture that values education much to a large extent, let alone patriotism or civility.
The out of wedlock birth rate among blacks in this country, and their high school drop out rate is sad and alarming. The amount of crime by illegal immigrants and their percentage as violent federal prisoners in our jails is scary. Illegal Hispanic crime gangs are committing rapes and murders of our citizens at a chilling level. The number of Hispanics on Medicaid and other government entitlement programs is stunning. And I could go on and on.
Excuses for this behavior are rampant, but all I can say is that if they cannot make it in America, then where? Between affirmative action, our catering to non-English speaking people, our leniency in the court and prison system, our sanctuary cities, our overly compassionate laws, etc. etc. there really is no excuse for any of this.
We even go so far as to make excuses for violent minority criminals. They had a tough upbringing, they suffered immense systematic abuses, they're victims of racism and discrimination, blah, blah, blah. So when they rape a teenage girl, or shoot a police officer, or riot in the streets of Los Angeles, we forgive them their sins and absolve them of any personal responsibility by saying it is not their fault. Kleptomania (because they grew up poor), pedophilia (because they were abused as a child), alcoholism (because life is tough), etc., etc. are all diseases brought on by someone or something other than the individual.
I have a question, however. Why isn't racism a disease? Consider this, you're 65 years old and you live in a small town. Twenty years ago it was a quiet, quaint, peaceful place to live where there had never ever been a single mugging, shooting, or homicide. Well, it was such a cheap place to live that all of a sudden a lot of minority people began to move into town to the point where they make up over 30% of the population. However, now you notice something...there is gang graffiti sprayed on the walls all over buildings on Main Street, the paper has daily stories about car jackings, muggings, and meth labs exploding. The murder rate has gone from zero over the previous 50 years to now over a dozen per year.
Now let me ask you something, how does one not become a racist after all of this? How do you not begin to generalize and even stereotype certain people in your community? How is a granny walking down the street, who sees a minority person coming the other way, not expected to be so frightened that she clings harder to her purse and decides to cross the street and walk on the other side? How is a cop not expected to racially profile? Think about that for a moment.
She is horrified to realize that she has become a racist. She was always so proud of being open minded. Now she sees differently. Can anyone blame her?
I am generalizing, of course. Many minorities are good people. By the way, nothing I have said hasn't been said by conservative minorities themselves such as John McWhorter, Michelle Malkin, Linda Chavez, J.C.Watts, and the list goes on.
Here is an excerpt from an article I wrote on the subject in pharmacy school.
What’s So Great About America?, by Dinesh D’Souza, is one of the best books to come to market in years. The author is a native born Indian (not American Indian) who became a U.S. citizen in 1991. As a member of a minority group, he has a unique outlook on American culture and values, and his comparison of America to other countries is intriguing. He also delves into a vast range of other areas including world history, colonization, education, multiculturalism, philosophy, and economics- to name just a few. It would be a challenge for anyone to read this book, and refute any of the premises made and conclusions formed. D’Souza has also written several other outstanding books such as Illiberal Education and The End of Racism.
Another excellent minority columnist is Michelle Malkin who, in her first book, Invasion, discusses the mass illegal immigration presently underway against America that jeopardizes our national security and very survival. Like D’Souza, Malkin’s immigrant origins provide her a unique perspective, and her reasoned analysis and logical examination of our nation’s immigration policy reveals that liberal laws governing immigration have actually aided and abetted terrorists groups seeking to destroy our way of life. Her conclusions are practically impervious to the emotional tirades of her ideological opponents, and, just like D’Souza, her references are impeccable. More outstanding books by minority writers include: Losing the Race and Authentically Black by John McWhorter who discusses the “self-sabotage in black America”, Black Lies, White Lies by Tony Brown, An Unlikely Conservative by Linda Chavez, Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality, by Thomas Sowell, and Showdown: Confronting Bias, Lies and the Special Interests That Divide America, by Larry Elder who analyzes the biases dominating campus teaching.
Abigail and Stephen Thernstrom have produced a book that should rock the nation. "No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in Learning" is a brilliant analysis of what ails American education today. Though the Thernstroms will doubtless receive a certain amount of abuse for tackling this sensitive subject, no fair-minded person reading this scholarly and lucid book can fail to recognize their good faith. It is hard to imagine a more necessary book about domestic policy. The Thernstroms deserve the title "civil rights activists" more than any other living Americans because they are outraged about the greatest obstacle to full racial equality: poor educational performance by black and Hispanic kids. They begin with an unflinching look at the data. "Seventy-seven percent of white students today," write the Thernstroms, "read better than the average black student. And conversely, only 23 percent of blacks read as well or better than the average white."
In math and science, things are even worse. "The average black and Hispanic student at the end of high school has academic skills that are at about the eighth-grade level," they write. "No Excuses" demolishes the conventional wisdom about the reasons for failing kids and failing schools. For example, the imagined difference in spending between rich and poor neighborhoods turns out to be illusory. Schools with more than 50 percent minority students spent almost as much per pupil in 1989-'90 ($4,103) as those that were nearly all white ( $4,389). Even the differential between wealthy suburban schools and inner city ones turns out to be only about 5 percent. And black children who attend wealthy suburban schools tend to perform below the level of poor whites on academic tests. So what to make of it? Hispanic students suffer from the recent immigrant handicap. But for blacks, the answer lies partly in the realm of culture. Black parents simply do not demand as much academic rigor of their children as whites and Asians. Black students who reported that they were "working just as hard as they could" spent 3.9 hours per week on homework. For whites, the figure was 5.4 hours; for Asians, 7.5 hours. Black kids also spend more than twice as many hours a day watching television as whites. And when students were surveyed about the lowest grade they could receive without getting into trouble with their parents, Asians said A-, whites said B-, and blacks and Hispanics said C-.
The Thernstroms take the reader to a number of innovative charter schools in poor neighborhoods that are taking average kids from less than ideal homes (no "creaming") and producing highly successful pupils. Among the roadblocks to reform are teachers unions that strenuously resist merit pay, competency tests, alternative certification and choice. "Unless more schools are freed from the constraints of the traditional public school system," the Thernstroms write, "the racial gap in academic achievement will not significantly narrow, we suspect. Indeed, every urban school should become a charter. States must insist that schools meet rigorous academic standards, and student results on statewide standards-based tests should be the most important measure of success." The motto of one of the schools the Thernstroms admire is "No excuses." It is staggering to consider that so many have been content for so long to excuse the scandal of failing schools in America. This learned and deeply humane book shines a spotlight on them and points the way to a better future.
There was a time when it was unpardonable for a non-minority person to raise such discussions in the media. Thankfully, our nation has begun to turn the corner on this matter, and an authentic national dialogue on issues vital to the future of our nation is once again becoming possible. That is, of course, with the exception of many elite college campuses, where liberal thinking stifles the very freedom of speech once so strongly defended by our forefathers. It is ironic that so many institutions of higher learning are no longer open to free thinking or debate.
Anyway, when I dated this girl, no one liked it. I didn't care. I was crazy about her. I lost my virginity at this time. Previous to her I dated a Hispanic girl, Lara Fornea, who I loved very much. I remember my best friend at the time telling me that he would no longer be my friend if I dated her. I did anyway. He later said he respected me for that and apologized. Since those days, I dated maybe three Caucasian women. All the rest were minorities, and there were many.
Many of my heroes are minorities including people such as Prince, who I have loved since I was 12 years old, Bruce Lee who I have the utmost respect for and have followed closely for about 15 years now, Supreme Court Justic Clarence Thomas is a hero of mine because of what he has had to endure, and I have said over and over again that I would vote for Condoleezza Rice for President if she would only run because I think she is a genius and an honorable person. The same goes for Linda Chavez. Dinesh D'Souza is my favorite book author, and Michelle Malkin is my favorite blogger and columnist.
In pharmacy school my closest friends were all minorities. I actually had only one close Caucasian friend, the rest were only schoolmates and acquaintances really. My click was almost all Asian, and two of my closest friends were black, one was from Nigeria. I am currently married to an alluring woman of Chinese and Vietnamese decent, who received her doctorate along with me, and adore her two little girls.
One of the best pharmacy technicians I ever had was a great kid from Cuba named Osniel who I am still trying to hire in my current pharmacy to this day. I have friends at my place of work, Ana in particular, who I like very much. They are wonderful people.
Having said that, I have a real problem with some minorities in this country. I think illegal immigration is a larger threat to America than terrorism is (drugs, violent crime, bankrupt hospital system, welfare fraud, etc.). I think too many Hispanics (legal and illegal) have a harmful value system and culture, and I have a real problem with blacks committing a vastly disproportionate amount of crime in this country. Neither of these two groups hold dear a culture that values education much to a large extent, let alone patriotism or civility.
The out of wedlock birth rate among blacks in this country, and their high school drop out rate is sad and alarming. The amount of crime by illegal immigrants and their percentage as violent federal prisoners in our jails is scary. Illegal Hispanic crime gangs are committing rapes and murders of our citizens at a chilling level. The number of Hispanics on Medicaid and other government entitlement programs is stunning. And I could go on and on.
Excuses for this behavior are rampant, but all I can say is that if they cannot make it in America, then where? Between affirmative action, our catering to non-English speaking people, our leniency in the court and prison system, our sanctuary cities, our overly compassionate laws, etc. etc. there really is no excuse for any of this.
We even go so far as to make excuses for violent minority criminals. They had a tough upbringing, they suffered immense systematic abuses, they're victims of racism and discrimination, blah, blah, blah. So when they rape a teenage girl, or shoot a police officer, or riot in the streets of Los Angeles, we forgive them their sins and absolve them of any personal responsibility by saying it is not their fault. Kleptomania (because they grew up poor), pedophilia (because they were abused as a child), alcoholism (because life is tough), etc., etc. are all diseases brought on by someone or something other than the individual.
I have a question, however. Why isn't racism a disease? Consider this, you're 65 years old and you live in a small town. Twenty years ago it was a quiet, quaint, peaceful place to live where there had never ever been a single mugging, shooting, or homicide. Well, it was such a cheap place to live that all of a sudden a lot of minority people began to move into town to the point where they make up over 30% of the population. However, now you notice something...there is gang graffiti sprayed on the walls all over buildings on Main Street, the paper has daily stories about car jackings, muggings, and meth labs exploding. The murder rate has gone from zero over the previous 50 years to now over a dozen per year.
Now let me ask you something, how does one not become a racist after all of this? How do you not begin to generalize and even stereotype certain people in your community? How is a granny walking down the street, who sees a minority person coming the other way, not expected to be so frightened that she clings harder to her purse and decides to cross the street and walk on the other side? How is a cop not expected to racially profile? Think about that for a moment.
She is horrified to realize that she has become a racist. She was always so proud of being open minded. Now she sees differently. Can anyone blame her?
I am generalizing, of course. Many minorities are good people. By the way, nothing I have said hasn't been said by conservative minorities themselves such as John McWhorter, Michelle Malkin, Linda Chavez, J.C.Watts, and the list goes on.
Here is an excerpt from an article I wrote on the subject in pharmacy school.
What’s So Great About America?, by Dinesh D’Souza, is one of the best books to come to market in years. The author is a native born Indian (not American Indian) who became a U.S. citizen in 1991. As a member of a minority group, he has a unique outlook on American culture and values, and his comparison of America to other countries is intriguing. He also delves into a vast range of other areas including world history, colonization, education, multiculturalism, philosophy, and economics- to name just a few. It would be a challenge for anyone to read this book, and refute any of the premises made and conclusions formed. D’Souza has also written several other outstanding books such as Illiberal Education and The End of Racism.
Another excellent minority columnist is Michelle Malkin who, in her first book, Invasion, discusses the mass illegal immigration presently underway against America that jeopardizes our national security and very survival. Like D’Souza, Malkin’s immigrant origins provide her a unique perspective, and her reasoned analysis and logical examination of our nation’s immigration policy reveals that liberal laws governing immigration have actually aided and abetted terrorists groups seeking to destroy our way of life. Her conclusions are practically impervious to the emotional tirades of her ideological opponents, and, just like D’Souza, her references are impeccable. More outstanding books by minority writers include: Losing the Race and Authentically Black by John McWhorter who discusses the “self-sabotage in black America”, Black Lies, White Lies by Tony Brown, An Unlikely Conservative by Linda Chavez, Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality, by Thomas Sowell, and Showdown: Confronting Bias, Lies and the Special Interests That Divide America, by Larry Elder who analyzes the biases dominating campus teaching.
Abigail and Stephen Thernstrom have produced a book that should rock the nation. "No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in Learning" is a brilliant analysis of what ails American education today. Though the Thernstroms will doubtless receive a certain amount of abuse for tackling this sensitive subject, no fair-minded person reading this scholarly and lucid book can fail to recognize their good faith. It is hard to imagine a more necessary book about domestic policy. The Thernstroms deserve the title "civil rights activists" more than any other living Americans because they are outraged about the greatest obstacle to full racial equality: poor educational performance by black and Hispanic kids. They begin with an unflinching look at the data. "Seventy-seven percent of white students today," write the Thernstroms, "read better than the average black student. And conversely, only 23 percent of blacks read as well or better than the average white."
In math and science, things are even worse. "The average black and Hispanic student at the end of high school has academic skills that are at about the eighth-grade level," they write. "No Excuses" demolishes the conventional wisdom about the reasons for failing kids and failing schools. For example, the imagined difference in spending between rich and poor neighborhoods turns out to be illusory. Schools with more than 50 percent minority students spent almost as much per pupil in 1989-'90 ($4,103) as those that were nearly all white ( $4,389). Even the differential between wealthy suburban schools and inner city ones turns out to be only about 5 percent. And black children who attend wealthy suburban schools tend to perform below the level of poor whites on academic tests. So what to make of it? Hispanic students suffer from the recent immigrant handicap. But for blacks, the answer lies partly in the realm of culture. Black parents simply do not demand as much academic rigor of their children as whites and Asians. Black students who reported that they were "working just as hard as they could" spent 3.9 hours per week on homework. For whites, the figure was 5.4 hours; for Asians, 7.5 hours. Black kids also spend more than twice as many hours a day watching television as whites. And when students were surveyed about the lowest grade they could receive without getting into trouble with their parents, Asians said A-, whites said B-, and blacks and Hispanics said C-.
The Thernstroms take the reader to a number of innovative charter schools in poor neighborhoods that are taking average kids from less than ideal homes (no "creaming") and producing highly successful pupils. Among the roadblocks to reform are teachers unions that strenuously resist merit pay, competency tests, alternative certification and choice. "Unless more schools are freed from the constraints of the traditional public school system," the Thernstroms write, "the racial gap in academic achievement will not significantly narrow, we suspect. Indeed, every urban school should become a charter. States must insist that schools meet rigorous academic standards, and student results on statewide standards-based tests should be the most important measure of success." The motto of one of the schools the Thernstroms admire is "No excuses." It is staggering to consider that so many have been content for so long to excuse the scandal of failing schools in America. This learned and deeply humane book shines a spotlight on them and points the way to a better future.
There was a time when it was unpardonable for a non-minority person to raise such discussions in the media. Thankfully, our nation has begun to turn the corner on this matter, and an authentic national dialogue on issues vital to the future of our nation is once again becoming possible. That is, of course, with the exception of many elite college campuses, where liberal thinking stifles the very freedom of speech once so strongly defended by our forefathers. It is ironic that so many institutions of higher learning are no longer open to free thinking or debate.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Random Thoughts 2
Conservatism is a maxim founded on the universal experience of mankind.
My conceits are not such that I would expect any changes be made regarding my, and my friends’, personal situation, but a look at our immigration system in general must occur. Good people are not being utilized. At a time when such a shortage of teachers is abundant, it is maddening and vexing when one is prevented from helping to alleviate this calamity by nothing more than an inept system.
Politicians are scared to act based on political correctness, We need to speak up. Right now America suffers from obsessive compassion disorder.
As soon as you step foot in a foreign land, are you suddenly an expert in their culture, mores, norms, values, or history? You can be a world traveler and not know shit about the world. Did you have to live in Germany in the mid-20th century to know that Hitler was a bad guy? In fact, you were less likely to know it if you did. Do you have to live in Detroit to know it is a violent city?
Do Mexicans do good work? What is the value of cheap labor, really? My house was built by Hispanics, many of which I suspect are illegals, and the flaws in the construction are abundant. One actually admitted to me after we had moved in that they were "getting much better" at construction.
Look at South American countries, do we want the U.S. to be that way? They do not renounce their homeland like immigrants did at the turn of the 20th century. Today’s immigrants do not look at the U.S. as their home like the Europeans did. See the Mexican protest march that was held in California relatively recently.
As our population ages and the number of prescription drugs escalates, our encounters with pharmacists will become more and more prevalent.
I wanted to be knowledgeable about politics so, just like anything else, I studied it and the more I learned, the more conservative I became.
My conceits are not such that I would expect any changes be made regarding my, and my friends’, personal situation, but a look at our immigration system in general must occur. Good people are not being utilized. At a time when such a shortage of teachers is abundant, it is maddening and vexing when one is prevented from helping to alleviate this calamity by nothing more than an inept system.
Politicians are scared to act based on political correctness, We need to speak up. Right now America suffers from obsessive compassion disorder.
As soon as you step foot in a foreign land, are you suddenly an expert in their culture, mores, norms, values, or history? You can be a world traveler and not know shit about the world. Did you have to live in Germany in the mid-20th century to know that Hitler was a bad guy? In fact, you were less likely to know it if you did. Do you have to live in Detroit to know it is a violent city?
Do Mexicans do good work? What is the value of cheap labor, really? My house was built by Hispanics, many of which I suspect are illegals, and the flaws in the construction are abundant. One actually admitted to me after we had moved in that they were "getting much better" at construction.
Look at South American countries, do we want the U.S. to be that way? They do not renounce their homeland like immigrants did at the turn of the 20th century. Today’s immigrants do not look at the U.S. as their home like the Europeans did. See the Mexican protest march that was held in California relatively recently.
As our population ages and the number of prescription drugs escalates, our encounters with pharmacists will become more and more prevalent.
I wanted to be knowledgeable about politics so, just like anything else, I studied it and the more I learned, the more conservative I became.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Random Thoughts
Hatred for America around the world stems from the same source that resentment of the rich by the poor or powerful by the helpless exists. Perhaps it is the 'disadvantaged' who need enlightening and a reversal of their way of thinking.
What would liberals do if Bush said he wanted to pull out of Iraq based on what Jesus told him?
Spotting a thin black woman in Wal-Mart is like spotting a panther or deer in Florida. The obesity rate among this group is staggering. Their health is at risk.
Bill Clinton used the military more than any peacetime President: Iraq, Serbia, Sudan, Afghanistan.
Poverty does not breed violence. That's a slur.
Violent Jesus? Mark 11:15. Mathew chapter 10 verse 34- "bring sword."
A mind employed is always happy.
It is amazing what we can do if we are always doing.
A body isolated will attract other bodies in motion...scary, scary motion.
Liberals ought to investigate conservative claims so as to disprove them and expose the fraud, but they don't do this. They just attack on a personal level instead.
Self-sentencing to eternal ignorance is our refusal to hear the other side of the argument. The ability to articulate the opposition's view shows political maturity.
If all cultures are equal, then giving them all the best education will naturally result in diversity.
Why do immigrants come here? To succeed & forcing them to assimilate is the best way to help them. How well did they fare before Chicano studies and Mexicanism? They are in America, not of it.
Journalists say they cannot chose sides when their own country is at war due to integrity, but they can chose the Democrats over the Republicans.
Human perfectibility, social equality, etc. are dreams which conveniently overlook human nature. Democrat liberals' problem is adopting a French philosophic style of thinking.
Corporations do not prioritize patient safety by hiring bad technicians. Fear of firing them (i.e. The Disability Act, etc.) plays a role. The only solution is to require standardized training programs and mandatory licensing thereby forcing corps. to hire qualified people.
Liberals value equality over success and to them what feels right is paramount to what is right. They are emotional hemophiliacs.
Hyphenated Americans unite!
Homosexuality taught in American schools is all right if Christians protest, but not if Muslim parents do.
The rich in Ireland are so because...no corporate taxes!
I am an affectionate citizen of the USA and have a zeal for my country.
More Americans will vote for an unqualified black than those who won't vote for one despite how qualified.
How many minorities won't vote for a white, or women vote for a woman?
Life is a struggle against oneself.
You can't improve inward if you're always blaming outward.
Confidence derives from achievement. Pride derives from accomplishment.
The meek may inherit the earth but they will contribute nothing to it. Through boldness and confidence are great things accomplished.
Why do liberals want to turn America into the countries that immigrants are fleeing from?
Iraqi's didn't ask for Democracy, science, Capitalism, etc. just like slaves did not ask for freedom (too scared).
Political correctness prevents us from acknowledging what our eyes see.
Nothing strikes fear into my heart like that pale, pasty yellow New Jersey license plate.
What would liberals do if Bush said he wanted to pull out of Iraq based on what Jesus told him?
Spotting a thin black woman in Wal-Mart is like spotting a panther or deer in Florida. The obesity rate among this group is staggering. Their health is at risk.
Bill Clinton used the military more than any peacetime President: Iraq, Serbia, Sudan, Afghanistan.
Poverty does not breed violence. That's a slur.
Violent Jesus? Mark 11:15. Mathew chapter 10 verse 34- "bring sword."
A mind employed is always happy.
It is amazing what we can do if we are always doing.
A body isolated will attract other bodies in motion...scary, scary motion.
Liberals ought to investigate conservative claims so as to disprove them and expose the fraud, but they don't do this. They just attack on a personal level instead.
Self-sentencing to eternal ignorance is our refusal to hear the other side of the argument. The ability to articulate the opposition's view shows political maturity.
If all cultures are equal, then giving them all the best education will naturally result in diversity.
Why do immigrants come here? To succeed & forcing them to assimilate is the best way to help them. How well did they fare before Chicano studies and Mexicanism? They are in America, not of it.
Journalists say they cannot chose sides when their own country is at war due to integrity, but they can chose the Democrats over the Republicans.
Human perfectibility, social equality, etc. are dreams which conveniently overlook human nature. Democrat liberals' problem is adopting a French philosophic style of thinking.
Corporations do not prioritize patient safety by hiring bad technicians. Fear of firing them (i.e. The Disability Act, etc.) plays a role. The only solution is to require standardized training programs and mandatory licensing thereby forcing corps. to hire qualified people.
Liberals value equality over success and to them what feels right is paramount to what is right. They are emotional hemophiliacs.
Hyphenated Americans unite!
Homosexuality taught in American schools is all right if Christians protest, but not if Muslim parents do.
The rich in Ireland are so because...no corporate taxes!
I am an affectionate citizen of the USA and have a zeal for my country.
More Americans will vote for an unqualified black than those who won't vote for one despite how qualified.
How many minorities won't vote for a white, or women vote for a woman?
Life is a struggle against oneself.
You can't improve inward if you're always blaming outward.
Confidence derives from achievement. Pride derives from accomplishment.
The meek may inherit the earth but they will contribute nothing to it. Through boldness and confidence are great things accomplished.
Why do liberals want to turn America into the countries that immigrants are fleeing from?
Iraqi's didn't ask for Democracy, science, Capitalism, etc. just like slaves did not ask for freedom (too scared).
Political correctness prevents us from acknowledging what our eyes see.
Nothing strikes fear into my heart like that pale, pasty yellow New Jersey license plate.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Commiss Price
Commissioner John Wiley Price has won the world’s all time dumbest complaint when he took offense to the term ‘black hole.’ Of all of the stupid things to protest. This man is pathetic. He, and his ilk, are obsessed with race!
Has the fragile ego of blacks in this country gotten so deranged as to now demand that we re-label astronomical terms? Sure, someone ought to take the time to explain, sadly, that it is not the word itself but the context in which it is said and the intent behind it that matters. This colossal idiot actually said that people ought to watch what they say, and then started commenting on other insidious terms like angel food cake, and devils’ cake. Is this not America in which we live any more? Since when do we have to ‘watch what we say’?
Following this line of thinking, if you can call it that, then perhaps we ought to change any term with any reference to color of any kind. Black cats should be referred to as African American cats, black pepper is now African American pepper, if the power goes out in a large area we’ll have to refer to it as an African American out, there are no more black cars, now they are African American cars, and black holes are African American holes I guess. Would Mr. Price have us rename the Beatle’s White Album? What should we call it- the Caucasian Album?
I say this is it folks, enough is enough. All Americans ought to tell clods like this Mr. Price to “get over it!” I guess that is the main weakness of ‘white’ culture- too compassionate, too understanding, too forgiving, too accommodating. At what point do we allow common frickin’ sense to play a role, and once and for all put an end to this foolishness? When, for God’s sake, will we as a collective tell people of Mr. Price’s abhorrent persuasion that we are sick and tired of this fixation on color? In short, when will Americans, blacks most especially, tell these race hustlers to shut up and go to hell?
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Hollywood Fads
I'm tired of Hollywood preaching to me. {in progress}
Here's a list, off of the top of my head, of the messages subtly, and not so subtly, implanted in movies today.
Lesbian kissing: every third movie seems to have a scene clumsily thrown in there where two women are kissing. Along with this is every fourth movie where gay men are so intelligent, charming, and witty. They only make up 3% of the population! Ever know any homosexuals? I have. They're always angry and ugly. They're often boorish and surly jerks!
Villains smoking: Anytime, just about, that you see someone smoking a cigar in a movie, you can bet that it is a villain, and almost always white. In fact, I can't think of a non-white villain right now.
Capitalists are immoral: From Gordon Gekko on, capitalists are always heartless, selfish, assholes devoid of any scruples who would sell their mother for an extra buck. When was the last time you saw a sympathetic wealthy person in a movie?
Minorities are academic: Despite the present 50% dropout rate among black high school kids in this country, whenever teamed up with white or asian kids, they're always portrayed as being more with it. And they're more moral as well.
Cops are dumb and violent: You know the last time a cop was seen as competent and unwilling to cross the line into brutality or privacy?...Psycho. Remember the cop in Psycho who followed Mrs. Curtis? Look at how they're portrayed today. Same goes for our soldiers. Always played as jerkwad alpha male, brainwashed goons constantly looking for a fight.
Fat is sexy: Why are fat people so celebrated in movies today? Where is the stigma that ought to be attached? No, I don't mean to imply that it is fine to poke fun at their expense, I just feel hollywood should treat them with half as much tough love as they do, say, smokers.
Religious people are nuts and violent: see Steven King.
105 pound women kicking ass: I can't tell you how sick I am of seeing semi-anorexic chicks kung fuing a 220 pound guy 5 feet into the air and 10 feet across the room.
The environment is fragile: Often capitalist scum are tearing down mother nature.
The government is corrupt: Again, CIA, FBI, you name it, they are ruthless quasi-mercenaries.
{specific examples to follow}
Here's a list, off of the top of my head, of the messages subtly, and not so subtly, implanted in movies today.
Lesbian kissing: every third movie seems to have a scene clumsily thrown in there where two women are kissing. Along with this is every fourth movie where gay men are so intelligent, charming, and witty. They only make up 3% of the population! Ever know any homosexuals? I have. They're always angry and ugly. They're often boorish and surly jerks!
Villains smoking: Anytime, just about, that you see someone smoking a cigar in a movie, you can bet that it is a villain, and almost always white. In fact, I can't think of a non-white villain right now.
Capitalists are immoral: From Gordon Gekko on, capitalists are always heartless, selfish, assholes devoid of any scruples who would sell their mother for an extra buck. When was the last time you saw a sympathetic wealthy person in a movie?
Minorities are academic: Despite the present 50% dropout rate among black high school kids in this country, whenever teamed up with white or asian kids, they're always portrayed as being more with it. And they're more moral as well.
Cops are dumb and violent: You know the last time a cop was seen as competent and unwilling to cross the line into brutality or privacy?...Psycho. Remember the cop in Psycho who followed Mrs. Curtis? Look at how they're portrayed today. Same goes for our soldiers. Always played as jerkwad alpha male, brainwashed goons constantly looking for a fight.
Fat is sexy: Why are fat people so celebrated in movies today? Where is the stigma that ought to be attached? No, I don't mean to imply that it is fine to poke fun at their expense, I just feel hollywood should treat them with half as much tough love as they do, say, smokers.
Religious people are nuts and violent: see Steven King.
105 pound women kicking ass: I can't tell you how sick I am of seeing semi-anorexic chicks kung fuing a 220 pound guy 5 feet into the air and 10 feet across the room.
The environment is fragile: Often capitalist scum are tearing down mother nature.
The government is corrupt: Again, CIA, FBI, you name it, they are ruthless quasi-mercenaries.
{specific examples to follow}
Naples Daily News

http://m.naplesnews.com/news/2005/Nov/27/guest_commentary_primer_heres_how_your_local_pharm/
Guest commentary: A primer: Here's how your local pharmacy operates
By JEAN-MARC BOVEE, Special to the Daily News Sunday, November 27, 2005
I began working retail pharmacy 13 years ago and I, along with all of my friends in pharmacy, have been having the exact same arguments with people and have been continuously explaining precisely the same things during our entire careers. It seems that there is a persistent unfamiliarity among the populace concerning the inner workings of pharmacies.
This is not to say that people are to blame, they simply have never been informed; that is the intention behind this article. It is only a microcosm in the vast universe of pharmacy, but it will cover a couple of the more common issues.
The question most often asked of retail pharmacists is what the cost of the prescription will be. Please read carefully because this is important: We can only give you the cash price of the medication before we fill it. If you have insurance, then we cannot tell you the price until we actually fill the prescription.
Here is how it works: We first have to enter your personal information including your prescription insurance info into our computer. We then type the prescription into our computer, our computer electronically transmits your prescription to your insurance company's computer, which then processes the prescription and transmits the price that we are to charge you to our printer.
Only at this point do we know the cost to you, but it takes time as you can see and we have not even physically filled the prescription yet.
Prescription insurance companies are the main reason for your extended wait times. Now, if upon hearing the cost you feel that it is incorrect, then you need to contact your prescription insurance company. Remember, they are sending the cost to you, to us.
We have essentially no say in what you get charged. Simply call the 1-800 number on the back of your card and they will be able to directly answer all of your questions; they can even give you the price before you go to the pharmacy. Again, they set the price, not us.
You may have heard the words "prior authorization" at the pharmacy at some point or another. This is the latest trend in third party over-stepping. Basically what your prescription insurance company is saying is that despite the fact that your doctor wrote the prescription him or herself, they still require that he or she call them on the phone and authorize it.
If that does not seem to make any sense to you, do not fret for it does not make much sense to us either. What we do is call the doctor's office, tell them we need a "prior auth," give them your insurance's phone number, and then wait for them to call us back with the authorization so that we can transmit your prescription through the insurance.
It sounds like a blast, doesn't it?
Just remember, this is the mere tip of the iceberg, so to speak, or write.
http://m.naplesnews.com/news/2005/Nov/27/guest_commentary_primer_heres_how_your_local_pharm/
Guest commentary: A primer: Here's how your local pharmacy operates
By JEAN-MARC BOVEE, Special to the Daily News Sunday, November 27, 2005
I began working retail pharmacy 13 years ago and I, along with all of my friends in pharmacy, have been having the exact same arguments with people and have been continuously explaining precisely the same things during our entire careers. It seems that there is a persistent unfamiliarity among the populace concerning the inner workings of pharmacies.
This is not to say that people are to blame, they simply have never been informed; that is the intention behind this article. It is only a microcosm in the vast universe of pharmacy, but it will cover a couple of the more common issues.
The question most often asked of retail pharmacists is what the cost of the prescription will be. Please read carefully because this is important: We can only give you the cash price of the medication before we fill it. If you have insurance, then we cannot tell you the price until we actually fill the prescription.
Here is how it works: We first have to enter your personal information including your prescription insurance info into our computer. We then type the prescription into our computer, our computer electronically transmits your prescription to your insurance company's computer, which then processes the prescription and transmits the price that we are to charge you to our printer.
Only at this point do we know the cost to you, but it takes time as you can see and we have not even physically filled the prescription yet.
Prescription insurance companies are the main reason for your extended wait times. Now, if upon hearing the cost you feel that it is incorrect, then you need to contact your prescription insurance company. Remember, they are sending the cost to you, to us.
We have essentially no say in what you get charged. Simply call the 1-800 number on the back of your card and they will be able to directly answer all of your questions; they can even give you the price before you go to the pharmacy. Again, they set the price, not us.
You may have heard the words "prior authorization" at the pharmacy at some point or another. This is the latest trend in third party over-stepping. Basically what your prescription insurance company is saying is that despite the fact that your doctor wrote the prescription him or herself, they still require that he or she call them on the phone and authorize it.
If that does not seem to make any sense to you, do not fret for it does not make much sense to us either. What we do is call the doctor's office, tell them we need a "prior auth," give them your insurance's phone number, and then wait for them to call us back with the authorization so that we can transmit your prescription through the insurance.
It sounds like a blast, doesn't it?
Just remember, this is the mere tip of the iceberg, so to speak, or write.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)