Both the Star Tribune and the Pioneer Press are (finally?) reporting about the increase in serious crime in our fair cities, something Rambix has been sounding the alarm on for many months. While the Strib's sub-headline talks about a meager 13% and 6% increase for Minneapolis and St. Paul respectively, the article buries the fact that aggrevated assualt and robberies rose by a staggering 23 and 22 percent respectively! The Strib actually interviewed (gasp!) police officials in trying to "understand" how this could possibly happen in their progressive utopia!
"You're never going to get a grip on everything and hope that crime goes away," Assistant Chief Tim Dolan said. "The harder you push on narcotics, you're going to see a growth somewhere else."
Gee, that's positive...get used to it Minneapolis...with people like this in charge of catching the criminals, it's going to get worse.
What is even better is how the Strib spins the numbers.
"The real important thing to realize is that if you're 40 or younger, we're enjoying some of the lowest crime rates of our lifetimes," said Christopher Uggen, a University of Minnesota sociology professor. "These are the good times."
Minneapolis, which as of Monday had logged 49 homicides this year, down from 55 last year, compares favorably with any large city, said criminologist Jack Levin, director of the Brudnick Center on Conflict and Violence at Northeastern University in Boston.
"Boston and Minneapolis have about the rosiest murder statistics in the U.S. for big cities," he said. "Minneapolis has always enjoyed a relatively low rate of crime."
Well either Mr. Levin has forgotten "Murderapolis" or he is ignorant of the history of Minneapolis. Things were so bad here in 1995 that the NY Times dubbed us "Murderapolis" - because gangs were taking over the poorest neighborhoods and were allowed to roam freely doing what gangs do. Fast forward to 2002 where 11 year old Tyesha Edwards was killed in her own home by gang crossfire! Fast forward again to 2005 where in the spring a 15 year old was pulled off of a Minneapolis City Bus by a gang of thugs who mistook him for a rival and beat him nearly to death. Fast forward again to December 21 where another teen was brutally beaten near a city bus stop for the crime of being white.
So what is the solution to this problem? According to the PiPress article, the Minneapolis Police seem to think that installing security camera's will do the trick! Here is a radical thought...why not arrest the wrong doers and put them in jail!!!!
The truly frightening thing is that when these crimials are finally caught by the Minneapolis Police Department, they are being released by the Hennepin County Court system! Rabix again is the definative site for all of the details, but the reason I bring this up is the 2006 Senatorial election. Amy Klobuchar, the current Hennepin County Attorney, is running for the DFL nomination for the Senate seat that Mark Dayton is vacating. Anyone who is interested in their safety really need to be wary of a candidate Klobuchar. Will Senator Klobuchar make the hard choices in order to make sure that they American people are safe? No one knows for sure, although Andy from Residual Forces and KvM is certainly trying to find out. It's a pity that the local press won't do their job and get those answers for us.
Saturday, December 31, 2005
Friday, December 30, 2005
The man who would be Senator
The January 2006 Mpls St Paul magazine (not available on line) has an article on Al Franken and his possible 2008 Senate run. The article offered some interesting insights into the man that would be Senator.
According to the article, Franken won't decide whether he will run or not until 2007, however there are several indications that it is more of a when, not an if. First indicator is (of course) the Minneapolis condominium that he and his wife bought last spring. Also, the nationally syndicated "Al Franken Show" will begin broadcasting from the Twin Cities in January. Then the article talks about a "letter written to his imaginary grandchildren, Barack, Hillary and Joe III" in which he speaks of his "victorious 2008 Senate race".
Al speaks about the impetus for his run. The Republicans "criminally cynical exploitation" of the Wellstone memorial service/campaign rally. I'm sorry Al, the only criminal cynical exploitation came from the people running the memorial service. They began the exploitation when they turned it into a campaign rally. If it had truly been a memorial service, speakers would not have been exhorting Republican politicans in attendence to vote for Walter Mondale in order to "honor Paul".
A couple of things are mentioned in the article that Republican activists and the Party need to take note of. This is not a whim. Al Franken is a progressive true believer. He loves the limelight and is quite comfortable in it. He also has hundreds of wealthy, influential friends in politics. He can (and no doubt will) bring in a cadre of entertainment and media friends to raise and donate money for the campaign. He also has a growing stack of IOU's within the state DFL. Another thing the DFL is looking to use against Senator Coleman (and Congressman Kennedy in 2006) is the unpopularity of President Bush. They intend to paint Senator Coleman as a "white, male suit who has voted consistently with George Bush". Franken is an attraction and a money magnet and the local media is already salivating over another "celebrity" candidate. However, even Al conceeds that could be detrimental to his campaign. He told the interviewer "Besides, Minnesotans may be willing to vote outside the box, but their last experience was not so hot, so they may be less willing to do it again..." GOP consultant, Sarah Janacek, is quoted as saying "People are tired of screeds from either the left or the right" and that Franken's "big city liberalism" will not play well in red suburbs like Eden Prairie and Rosemont. I hope she is correct.
Most interesting (and telling) were some anonymous DFLers who were quoted in the article. "He talks too much. He gets going on something and he doesn't know when to stop...I don't know if you can learn self control at his age." says one well placed DFL'er. "I believe in professional politicians" (ed - that what is wrong with the DFL), people who have spent their careers learning how the process works...I don't know if Al is skilled enough in the process to either get the nomination or win the election." says another. "What does Al bring to the party as a candidate? I mean, what is his defining charactaristic? That he's funny? I don't know if that's the defining quality I'm looking for in either a candidate or a Senator" said a third. OUCH!
The big thing that will hurt Franken's campaign with the progressive base is his stance on the use of the military. While he is opposed to the President's use of force in Iraq, he is not calling for the immediate pull out or even of setting a timetable for withdrawal. Granted, this could be a moot point in 2008, but given the reality of modern campaigning, he is going to need to get these people on board (for campaign contributions) today and that could hurt him badly.
I don't know which way this will play yet, but this I do know. The Republican Party can not take candidate Al lightly or they risk loosing the seat.
According to the article, Franken won't decide whether he will run or not until 2007, however there are several indications that it is more of a when, not an if. First indicator is (of course) the Minneapolis condominium that he and his wife bought last spring. Also, the nationally syndicated "Al Franken Show" will begin broadcasting from the Twin Cities in January. Then the article talks about a "letter written to his imaginary grandchildren, Barack, Hillary and Joe III" in which he speaks of his "victorious 2008 Senate race".
Al speaks about the impetus for his run. The Republicans "criminally cynical exploitation" of the Wellstone memorial service/campaign rally. I'm sorry Al, the only criminal cynical exploitation came from the people running the memorial service. They began the exploitation when they turned it into a campaign rally. If it had truly been a memorial service, speakers would not have been exhorting Republican politicans in attendence to vote for Walter Mondale in order to "honor Paul".
A couple of things are mentioned in the article that Republican activists and the Party need to take note of. This is not a whim. Al Franken is a progressive true believer. He loves the limelight and is quite comfortable in it. He also has hundreds of wealthy, influential friends in politics. He can (and no doubt will) bring in a cadre of entertainment and media friends to raise and donate money for the campaign. He also has a growing stack of IOU's within the state DFL. Another thing the DFL is looking to use against Senator Coleman (and Congressman Kennedy in 2006) is the unpopularity of President Bush. They intend to paint Senator Coleman as a "white, male suit who has voted consistently with George Bush". Franken is an attraction and a money magnet and the local media is already salivating over another "celebrity" candidate. However, even Al conceeds that could be detrimental to his campaign. He told the interviewer "Besides, Minnesotans may be willing to vote outside the box, but their last experience was not so hot, so they may be less willing to do it again..." GOP consultant, Sarah Janacek, is quoted as saying "People are tired of screeds from either the left or the right" and that Franken's "big city liberalism" will not play well in red suburbs like Eden Prairie and Rosemont. I hope she is correct.
Most interesting (and telling) were some anonymous DFLers who were quoted in the article. "He talks too much. He gets going on something and he doesn't know when to stop...I don't know if you can learn self control at his age." says one well placed DFL'er. "I believe in professional politicians" (ed - that what is wrong with the DFL), people who have spent their careers learning how the process works...I don't know if Al is skilled enough in the process to either get the nomination or win the election." says another. "What does Al bring to the party as a candidate? I mean, what is his defining charactaristic? That he's funny? I don't know if that's the defining quality I'm looking for in either a candidate or a Senator" said a third. OUCH!
The big thing that will hurt Franken's campaign with the progressive base is his stance on the use of the military. While he is opposed to the President's use of force in Iraq, he is not calling for the immediate pull out or even of setting a timetable for withdrawal. Granted, this could be a moot point in 2008, but given the reality of modern campaigning, he is going to need to get these people on board (for campaign contributions) today and that could hurt him badly.
I don't know which way this will play yet, but this I do know. The Republican Party can not take candidate Al lightly or they risk loosing the seat.
Just a follow up to my post last night on the "smokers tax"...
I was listening to the Laura Ingraham show this morning on my way into the office. Larry Mareno (guest host) was interviewing the owner of a health services company that has instituted a program designed to reduce the company's heath care costs by prohibiting (as a condition of employment) company employees from smoking. Not on the job, not after hours -NEVER. If you want to work here you must not smoke! Several employess quit and two were fired as a result of their breaking the terms of employment.
Now, as an ex-smoker and as a conservative, I think that what this gentleman did was ok. He is excercising his private property rights and his rights as a business owner, as long as it is not against the law (which I understand it is not according to the interview) he can hire who he wants - or at least that is how it is supposed to be....
What upset me about the segment was a caller. This caller stated that this action should be mandatory for all business owners! That in the name of "heath care" all businesses should be forced to test their employees for cigarette use. Regardless of the fact that mandatory testing for ILLEGAL drugs is considered an "invasion of privacy" this moron wants business owners to test for LEGAL substance use. What's next? Making Big Mac consumption a reason to terminate employment?
The big argument against municipal smoking bans is that the bans infringe on the property rights of the business (bar and restaurant) owner to do with his property as he sees fit. Maybe we need to take these smoking bans to court. If it is legal for employers to mandate their business to be no smoking areas, there certainly is no reason why a business owner couldn't be within their rights to do the opposite, is there?
I was listening to the Laura Ingraham show this morning on my way into the office. Larry Mareno (guest host) was interviewing the owner of a health services company that has instituted a program designed to reduce the company's heath care costs by prohibiting (as a condition of employment) company employees from smoking. Not on the job, not after hours -NEVER. If you want to work here you must not smoke! Several employess quit and two were fired as a result of their breaking the terms of employment.
Now, as an ex-smoker and as a conservative, I think that what this gentleman did was ok. He is excercising his private property rights and his rights as a business owner, as long as it is not against the law (which I understand it is not according to the interview) he can hire who he wants - or at least that is how it is supposed to be....
What upset me about the segment was a caller. This caller stated that this action should be mandatory for all business owners! That in the name of "heath care" all businesses should be forced to test their employees for cigarette use. Regardless of the fact that mandatory testing for ILLEGAL drugs is considered an "invasion of privacy" this moron wants business owners to test for LEGAL substance use. What's next? Making Big Mac consumption a reason to terminate employment?
The big argument against municipal smoking bans is that the bans infringe on the property rights of the business (bar and restaurant) owner to do with his property as he sees fit. Maybe we need to take these smoking bans to court. If it is legal for employers to mandate their business to be no smoking areas, there certainly is no reason why a business owner couldn't be within their rights to do the opposite, is there?
Handing it to the veterans again...
My husband is a veteran. He served in the military during the 1980's. We have many friends who are veterans as well. One, has been a caretaker at the Minnesota Veterans Camp on Big Island (Lake Minnetonka) for a few years. The Vets Camp is fairly run down, because the governing board that runs it has not put much money into it for quite some time. Our friend has put a lot of time and some personal money into the camp so that it can be used. We have had many discussions about the fate of the camp over the last couple of years.
Today, I saw this article in the Star Tribune. It appears my friend has someone else who is fighting for the camp's survival.
Maj. Mike Erickson served in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he still may not have been ready for the Battle of Big Island on Lake Minnetonka.
A little history on the camp...
In 1923 the Legislature leased land on Big Island as a living memorial to veterans. The property, according to the suit filed by Erickson's group, was to be used "as a respite for disabled and war-weary veterans and their families."
Here is the gist of the article....where the vets get the shaft...
But the camp's board of directors had already voted to sell the property to the city of Orono for $5.7 million. The deal, which included a $2 million state grant and $1.9 million in city bonds, was scheduled to close on Dec. 14.
A week ago, a Hennepin County district judge gave Erickson and his group until today to avoid dismissal of their lawsuit by posting a $238,000 bond. "We don't have it," a discouraged Erickson said.
Now a lot of veterans, my friend included, have challenged the legitimacy of the sale.
Bill Anderson, a former member of the board of directors, said he lost his seat because he did not agree with the decision to sell the camp. "In the public's eye," said Anderson, a Korean War veteran, " ... No, the pawns voted to sell it -- the shills."
You may ask why I am writing about this, when according to the article today was the last day for the vets to get the bond to stop the sale. It is my hope that maybe some of my good readers would be able to come to the aid of these fine veterans or at the least someone can help them find a way to bring an equitable resolution to this issue. If not that, to at least bring to the attention of the people, that our defenders of freedom are loosing, yet again, another promise that we made to them. We owe our troops better than broken promises and being shoved off of their campground for the sake of private developers.....
Today, I saw this article in the Star Tribune. It appears my friend has someone else who is fighting for the camp's survival.
Maj. Mike Erickson served in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he still may not have been ready for the Battle of Big Island on Lake Minnetonka.
A little history on the camp...
In 1923 the Legislature leased land on Big Island as a living memorial to veterans. The property, according to the suit filed by Erickson's group, was to be used "as a respite for disabled and war-weary veterans and their families."
Here is the gist of the article....where the vets get the shaft...
But the camp's board of directors had already voted to sell the property to the city of Orono for $5.7 million. The deal, which included a $2 million state grant and $1.9 million in city bonds, was scheduled to close on Dec. 14.
A week ago, a Hennepin County district judge gave Erickson and his group until today to avoid dismissal of their lawsuit by posting a $238,000 bond. "We don't have it," a discouraged Erickson said.
Now a lot of veterans, my friend included, have challenged the legitimacy of the sale.
Bill Anderson, a former member of the board of directors, said he lost his seat because he did not agree with the decision to sell the camp. "In the public's eye," said Anderson, a Korean War veteran, " ... No, the pawns voted to sell it -- the shills."
You may ask why I am writing about this, when according to the article today was the last day for the vets to get the bond to stop the sale. It is my hope that maybe some of my good readers would be able to come to the aid of these fine veterans or at the least someone can help them find a way to bring an equitable resolution to this issue. If not that, to at least bring to the attention of the people, that our defenders of freedom are loosing, yet again, another promise that we made to them. We owe our troops better than broken promises and being shoved off of their campground for the sake of private developers.....
Thursday, December 29, 2005
When is a fee a tax????
I wrote about our governor's ill-conceived tax, excuse me - "health impact fee" on tobacco products in this post about unintended consequences. Given the news of the last few days, the tax - er...fee - needs to be readdressed.
Recently a Ramsey County judge struck down the legality of the governor's "health impact fee" ruling that the $.75 per pack (of cigarettes) fee violated the terms of the states tobacco lawsuit settlement! Bravo Judge - you got the right answer. The Governor vowed to fight it. When I heard that I was stunned. The Governor has been taking lots of flack about this and other "compromises" from his base. The ouster of his ally (and chief cheerleader) Ron Eibensteiner from the Party chair should have been his wake up call. Then again, maybe it was. Yesterday's Star Tribune reports that the Governor will drop the fee if the appeal fails! Alleluia!
However some, including Republican Minnesota, has asked how can the governor forego the "millions" that the fee will bring in...well considering that the state is looking at a $1B budget surplus I don't think that will be that big of an issue.
The bottom line is that the state can not be balancing the budget on the backs of smokers. As I said back in August, smokers will go elsewhere to get their cigarettes or they will quit smoking. If the Governor were to ask for my solution to the budget issues, I would have a simple 2 word answer for him. REDUCE SPENDING!
Update: I just heard on Fox News that the American Cancer Society (and a coalition of heath care providers) is pushing to get a ballot initiative in California that will increase the cigarette tax $2.60 per pack. I am not a smoker, but if the smokers of America were to rise up in rebellion, I would be right there with them. Here is a link to the story.
Recently a Ramsey County judge struck down the legality of the governor's "health impact fee" ruling that the $.75 per pack (of cigarettes) fee violated the terms of the states tobacco lawsuit settlement! Bravo Judge - you got the right answer. The Governor vowed to fight it. When I heard that I was stunned. The Governor has been taking lots of flack about this and other "compromises" from his base. The ouster of his ally (and chief cheerleader) Ron Eibensteiner from the Party chair should have been his wake up call. Then again, maybe it was. Yesterday's Star Tribune reports that the Governor will drop the fee if the appeal fails! Alleluia!
However some, including Republican Minnesota, has asked how can the governor forego the "millions" that the fee will bring in...well considering that the state is looking at a $1B budget surplus I don't think that will be that big of an issue.
The bottom line is that the state can not be balancing the budget on the backs of smokers. As I said back in August, smokers will go elsewhere to get their cigarettes or they will quit smoking. If the Governor were to ask for my solution to the budget issues, I would have a simple 2 word answer for him. REDUCE SPENDING!
Update: I just heard on Fox News that the American Cancer Society (and a coalition of heath care providers) is pushing to get a ballot initiative in California that will increase the cigarette tax $2.60 per pack. I am not a smoker, but if the smokers of America were to rise up in rebellion, I would be right there with them. Here is a link to the story.
Cookies where the kids can get them...
I've always liked Dr. Walter E. Williams. He has a great, dry sense of humor. Plus, he makes the complex simple.
In his recent column( article ) ,once again, he makes the complex simple:
"Private property would solve the smoking issue. Suppose you owned a restaurant, and you didn't wish to permit smoking. How would you like it if people used the political system to enact laws that forced you to permit smoking? I'm sure you'd consider it tyranny, and I'd agree. But there's symmetry. It's just as much tyranny to use the political system to enact laws to force a restaurant owner who wished to permit smoking to ban smoking. The liberty-oriented solution might be to post a sign saying you don't permit smoking, and customers wishing otherwise wouldn't enter. The same principle would apply to restaurant owners who wished to permit smoking."
Try telling your left wing friends this and see how they respond.
Reminds me of a quote I heard from JFK: "What's mine is mine. What's yours is negotiable."
And interestingly enough, I found that the whole quote is: " The freedom of the city is not negotiable. We cannot negotiate with those who say, "What's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable." It came from an address to the people of the United States regarding the crisis in Berlin that eventually lead to the erection of the Berlin Wall a few months later ( article )(I remember seeing live TV of an East German soldier stringing concertina wire across an intersection that Sunday in August 1961) . JFK was telling the citizens of America that we could not negotiate with those who have the perspective of tyrants and despots.
Well, I certainly agree with him. I have no desire to negotiate with those who want to force me to give what I wish not to give and they are not entitled to.
It's called liberty.
In his recent column( article ) ,once again, he makes the complex simple:
"Private property would solve the smoking issue. Suppose you owned a restaurant, and you didn't wish to permit smoking. How would you like it if people used the political system to enact laws that forced you to permit smoking? I'm sure you'd consider it tyranny, and I'd agree. But there's symmetry. It's just as much tyranny to use the political system to enact laws to force a restaurant owner who wished to permit smoking to ban smoking. The liberty-oriented solution might be to post a sign saying you don't permit smoking, and customers wishing otherwise wouldn't enter. The same principle would apply to restaurant owners who wished to permit smoking."
Try telling your left wing friends this and see how they respond.
Reminds me of a quote I heard from JFK: "What's mine is mine. What's yours is negotiable."
And interestingly enough, I found that the whole quote is: " The freedom of the city is not negotiable. We cannot negotiate with those who say, "What's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable." It came from an address to the people of the United States regarding the crisis in Berlin that eventually lead to the erection of the Berlin Wall a few months later ( article )(I remember seeing live TV of an East German soldier stringing concertina wire across an intersection that Sunday in August 1961) . JFK was telling the citizens of America that we could not negotiate with those who have the perspective of tyrants and despots.
Well, I certainly agree with him. I have no desire to negotiate with those who want to force me to give what I wish not to give and they are not entitled to.
It's called liberty.
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Snippets of truth
I don't know about you, but as I get older, I've been discovering certain things about truth:
1. It's usually pretty simple. Now, I don't ever confuse simple with easy. As an example I was asking a group of young Bible students what was the 2nd highest mountain in the world (these kids are pretty smart, so I wanted to plumb the depths of their knowledge). They were a bit stumped, so I told them it was K2. I then asked how does one get to the top? One young lady said "Climb". Now, I was heading for "put one foot in front of another until you're at the top". But her comment was, well, simpler. So I then asked them if climbing the to the top of the 2nd highest mountain in the world was easy? They all replied no. But I told them it was simple. Never confuse the two.
2. The truth is usually fairly straightforward, direct. No shilly shallying.
3. It is resolute. It is unchanging. Beliefs may change. The truth doesn't.
4. As a consequence of #3:Truth is usually hard and not too uncommonly painful. It destroys all that is flung against it and therefore causes pain as reality takes over the fiction or the lie or closely held belief.
5. However painful,it is also liberating. Realization may be painful, and liberation also is usually found to be painful.
6.Because of this pain, very few people ever really seek the truth. Oh, they say they do. If asked the question "If you were wrong, would you want to know?" everyone would say yes. But were that the truth, there would be no left wingers. And no RINO's. As a very good friend of mine once said "You can not be well informed and intellectually honest AND be a left winger".
7. I usually find that when I discover a truth, it suddenly is so apparent, like I did know or at least should have known it all along.
And number 7 brings me to why I wrote this blog piece.
I was doing an internet search and came across an article from Kentucky about the fact that gun buy-ups don't work. And preceding the main point of the article I came across this small piece of truth:
"The natural assumption among adults living in this Commonwealth is that when we formulate public policy that affects the lives of all our citizens we'll be guided by facts and knowledge as adults should be, and NOT by emotions or childish fears. This is, after all, what adults are supposed to do." (Article here ).
And as I read it, it occurred to me that this was the truth. Simple, direct, to the point.
1. It's usually pretty simple. Now, I don't ever confuse simple with easy. As an example I was asking a group of young Bible students what was the 2nd highest mountain in the world (these kids are pretty smart, so I wanted to plumb the depths of their knowledge). They were a bit stumped, so I told them it was K2. I then asked how does one get to the top? One young lady said "Climb". Now, I was heading for "put one foot in front of another until you're at the top". But her comment was, well, simpler. So I then asked them if climbing the to the top of the 2nd highest mountain in the world was easy? They all replied no. But I told them it was simple. Never confuse the two.
2. The truth is usually fairly straightforward, direct. No shilly shallying.
3. It is resolute. It is unchanging. Beliefs may change. The truth doesn't.
4. As a consequence of #3:Truth is usually hard and not too uncommonly painful. It destroys all that is flung against it and therefore causes pain as reality takes over the fiction or the lie or closely held belief.
5. However painful,it is also liberating. Realization may be painful, and liberation also is usually found to be painful.
6.Because of this pain, very few people ever really seek the truth. Oh, they say they do. If asked the question "If you were wrong, would you want to know?" everyone would say yes. But were that the truth, there would be no left wingers. And no RINO's. As a very good friend of mine once said "You can not be well informed and intellectually honest AND be a left winger".
7. I usually find that when I discover a truth, it suddenly is so apparent, like I did know or at least should have known it all along.
And number 7 brings me to why I wrote this blog piece.
I was doing an internet search and came across an article from Kentucky about the fact that gun buy-ups don't work. And preceding the main point of the article I came across this small piece of truth:
"The natural assumption among adults living in this Commonwealth is that when we formulate public policy that affects the lives of all our citizens we'll be guided by facts and knowledge as adults should be, and NOT by emotions or childish fears. This is, after all, what adults are supposed to do." (Article here ).
And as I read it, it occurred to me that this was the truth. Simple, direct, to the point.
"High tech" mass transit
I have had this in my "pending" file since before Christmas.
The Minneapolis City Council, rather than tackling crime in their fair city (see Rambix for all the stories) has dedicated $300,000 in order to "study" whether a streetcar line would be a useful form of mass transit. The thing that got me was the first line of the article. The reporter gave the readers an unintended (I think) insight into the city council's mindset when she wrote:
"Minneapolis has a desire named streetcar."
The reporter continued to gush about the history of streetcars in Minneapolis and quoted Mayor Ryback:
"We're looking to add more energy to our main streets," Rybak said Wednesday. "It puts us on the cutting edge of American cities, but ironically it also grows out of the city's history. Minneapolis grew along streetcar lines, and that's part of what created the charm of our neighborhood commercial districts."
What the Mayor forgets though, is that trolleys would run (according to the city's plans) on streets that are already over croweded with car, bus, pedestrian and (in a couple of places) light rail traffic. Adding more vehicles to already crowded streets is a recipe for disaster. Since the day that the light rail trains started running, we have had several train/car accidents that have resulted in many deaths. Remember, we are talking about a mindset where people drive their cars out on to thin ice because they "didn't want to walk that far".
The last thing the City of Minneapolis needs is trolley cars fighting for space on Washington Avenue or Lake Street Mayor Ryback. Instead, let's focus on getting the petty thieves off of the streets of Minneapolis so that the suburban residents who work and visit in your city aren't afraid to meet the same fate as this person, this person and this person.
The Minneapolis City Council, rather than tackling crime in their fair city (see Rambix for all the stories) has dedicated $300,000 in order to "study" whether a streetcar line would be a useful form of mass transit. The thing that got me was the first line of the article. The reporter gave the readers an unintended (I think) insight into the city council's mindset when she wrote:
"Minneapolis has a desire named streetcar."
The reporter continued to gush about the history of streetcars in Minneapolis and quoted Mayor Ryback:
"We're looking to add more energy to our main streets," Rybak said Wednesday. "It puts us on the cutting edge of American cities, but ironically it also grows out of the city's history. Minneapolis grew along streetcar lines, and that's part of what created the charm of our neighborhood commercial districts."
What the Mayor forgets though, is that trolleys would run (according to the city's plans) on streets that are already over croweded with car, bus, pedestrian and (in a couple of places) light rail traffic. Adding more vehicles to already crowded streets is a recipe for disaster. Since the day that the light rail trains started running, we have had several train/car accidents that have resulted in many deaths. Remember, we are talking about a mindset where people drive their cars out on to thin ice because they "didn't want to walk that far".
The last thing the City of Minneapolis needs is trolley cars fighting for space on Washington Avenue or Lake Street Mayor Ryback. Instead, let's focus on getting the petty thieves off of the streets of Minneapolis so that the suburban residents who work and visit in your city aren't afraid to meet the same fate as this person, this person and this person.
Where is NOW?????
Now our friends over at Anti-Strib have cornered the market on the dark side of Islam, which is one reason why I have stayed away from the subject, but there was a side to this story, that I didn't know if the men over there would pick up on which is why I decided to post on it.
"And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.
A few months earlier, in Copenhagen, Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi created uproar when – like his peer in Australia – he stated that women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.
And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, “For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.”
I only have one thing to say.... WHERE ARE THE CRIES OF OUTRAGE FROM THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN????? Their silence on this speaks volumes about the American left.....
Update - Sequel over at Anti-Strib has a post this morning on this Times Online story...
"a Sharia judge who has ordered the punishment of women for not wearing headscarves, was uncompromising: “The tsunami was because of the sins of the people of Aceh.”
The silence you hear is the response of the American left....Womens rights???? What womens rights????
"And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.
A few months earlier, in Copenhagen, Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi created uproar when – like his peer in Australia – he stated that women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.
And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, “For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.”
I only have one thing to say.... WHERE ARE THE CRIES OF OUTRAGE FROM THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN????? Their silence on this speaks volumes about the American left.....
Update - Sequel over at Anti-Strib has a post this morning on this Times Online story...
"a Sharia judge who has ordered the punishment of women for not wearing headscarves, was uncompromising: “The tsunami was because of the sins of the people of Aceh.”
The silence you hear is the response of the American left....Womens rights???? What womens rights????
Monday, December 26, 2005
Now what are they going to do with it?
I found this story to be very interesting and heartening all at once. Couple that with this study and you have to wonder - is academia really coming to a realization about itself? Could the day actually be here when academia admits what conservative parents and students have been saying for several years now....that there is a decidedly leftist lean to academic America?
According to the Klein/Stern Study, the estimated ratio of Democratic leaning professors to Republican leaning professors in the social studies/humanities faculty (across America) is a stunning 8:1! Now this ratio is smaller is certain fields (mathematics and economics for example) but face it parents, your kids have to take social studies and humanities in college - they are going to be exposed to this in the classroom!
What's that you say? Surely the teachers don't bring their personal bias into the classroom? Not according to "a survey of students at 50 top universities showed that nearly half the students feel faculty use the classroom to present their personal political views, and that political discussions seem 'totally one-sided'."
Some other gems from the San Francisco Chronicle article:
-- Moderate U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander -- a former university president and one-time Secretary of Education -- told the Commission on the Future of Higher Education that the greatest threat to broader public support and increased funding for higher education is a "growing political one-sidedness which has infected most campuses."
-- The American Council of Trustees and Alumni, in its recent report "Intellectual Diversity: Time for Action," said "the most serious challenge for higher education today is the lack of intellectual diversity."
-- Earlier this year, the broad-based American Council on Education issued a statement, supported by 30 higher education organizations, acknowledging the growing concern about "intellectual pluralism" and the "free exchange of ideas" on campuses.
The self proclaimed bastions of diversity are any BUT diverse when it comes to thought. The consumers of education (read - students and their tuition paying parents) have got to start holding these universities and professors accountable.
It will be interesting to see what (if anything) academia does with this information. If they truly care about diversity (of race, creed, color etc) then they need to care about diversity of thought. Can they do it????? We'll see. If they do, it will finally be nice to see the elites practice what they preach!
According to the Klein/Stern Study, the estimated ratio of Democratic leaning professors to Republican leaning professors in the social studies/humanities faculty (across America) is a stunning 8:1! Now this ratio is smaller is certain fields (mathematics and economics for example) but face it parents, your kids have to take social studies and humanities in college - they are going to be exposed to this in the classroom!
What's that you say? Surely the teachers don't bring their personal bias into the classroom? Not according to "a survey of students at 50 top universities showed that nearly half the students feel faculty use the classroom to present their personal political views, and that political discussions seem 'totally one-sided'."
Some other gems from the San Francisco Chronicle article:
-- Moderate U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander -- a former university president and one-time Secretary of Education -- told the Commission on the Future of Higher Education that the greatest threat to broader public support and increased funding for higher education is a "growing political one-sidedness which has infected most campuses."
-- The American Council of Trustees and Alumni, in its recent report "Intellectual Diversity: Time for Action," said "the most serious challenge for higher education today is the lack of intellectual diversity."
-- Earlier this year, the broad-based American Council on Education issued a statement, supported by 30 higher education organizations, acknowledging the growing concern about "intellectual pluralism" and the "free exchange of ideas" on campuses.
The self proclaimed bastions of diversity are any BUT diverse when it comes to thought. The consumers of education (read - students and their tuition paying parents) have got to start holding these universities and professors accountable.
It will be interesting to see what (if anything) academia does with this information. If they truly care about diversity (of race, creed, color etc) then they need to care about diversity of thought. Can they do it????? We'll see. If they do, it will finally be nice to see the elites practice what they preach!
Saturday, December 24, 2005
To our Readers and Friends
Nine months ago, I was invited (by my friend Savage Republican) to embark on an adventure that I happily accepted. That adventure was to join him here at Savage Republican blog.
I would like to take the time to give my thanks to all of you: to Savage Republican and Amendment X for asking me to join you on this adventure. To Duane at Radio Blogger, a big thank you for the opportunity (via the Blog of the Week competition) to gain new friends and readers. To our readers, thank you for making us part of your lives and thank you for the votes to make Savage Republican co-Blog of the Week (with our new friend Andy at Residual Forces). To our friends in the Armed Forces, I thank you for your service and sacrifice and I pray for your safety and swift return home. To my friends in Louisiana and Mississippi, I pray that next year is much quieter (from a storm standpoint) and I pray for your swift recovery from the storms this year.
To all of I you, I wish the happiest of holidays. Merry Christmas, Happy Channukah and Happy New Year to all. 2006 is going to be a busy year, with the mid-term elections on the wing. I wish you all health, happiness and much joy (and maybe even a new Republican Senator for us in Minnesota?) for 2006.
I would like to take the time to give my thanks to all of you: to Savage Republican and Amendment X for asking me to join you on this adventure. To Duane at Radio Blogger, a big thank you for the opportunity (via the Blog of the Week competition) to gain new friends and readers. To our readers, thank you for making us part of your lives and thank you for the votes to make Savage Republican co-Blog of the Week (with our new friend Andy at Residual Forces). To our friends in the Armed Forces, I thank you for your service and sacrifice and I pray for your safety and swift return home. To my friends in Louisiana and Mississippi, I pray that next year is much quieter (from a storm standpoint) and I pray for your swift recovery from the storms this year.
To all of I you, I wish the happiest of holidays. Merry Christmas, Happy Channukah and Happy New Year to all. 2006 is going to be a busy year, with the mid-term elections on the wing. I wish you all health, happiness and much joy (and maybe even a new Republican Senator for us in Minnesota?) for 2006.
Has the American Press become "Baghdad" Rose?
Mark Simone, of WABC radio, covered something interesting on his show yesterday. He was talking about the broadcasts of "Tokyo Rose". Tokyo Rose (for those who are products of the public school system) is an amalgam of 5 female broadcasters (on Japanese Radio) whose propaganda broadcasts were specifically designed to demoralize the Allied forces in the Asian Theater. Mr. Simone (according to a friend of mine who listened to the broadcast) mentioned that the writers of these broadcasts did studies (on POW's?) designed to determine what would have the most adverse effect on our troops. Their top 3???
1. The president lied to get the US into the war
2. The real reason the president took the US to war was to profit large corporations
3. The war is not winnable [for the US]
Does any of this sound familiar dear readers?????
1. The president lied to get the US into the war
2. The real reason the president took the US to war was to profit large corporations
3. The war is not winnable [for the US]
Does any of this sound familiar dear readers?????
No Virginia, there is no Santa Clause...
This is exactly what most parents have against the "teaching establishment"! A substitute teacher in the Lickdale (PA) public schools decided that it was her duty to tell her class of first graders that Santa Clause didn't exist.
Theresa Farrisi stood in for (Jamey) Schaeffer’s regular music teacher one day last week. One of her assignments was to read Clement C. Moore’s famous poem, “A Visit from Saint Nicholas” to a first-grade class at Lickdale Elementary School.
“The poem has great literary value, but it goes against my conscience to teach something which I know to be false to children, who are impressionable,” said Farrisi, 43, of Myerstown. “It’s a story. I taught it as a story. There’s no real person called Santa Claus living at the North Pole.”
Well you'd better get out of teaching now, Ms. Farrisi. If you have such a problem teaching this "false" story to children, there will come a time in your teaching career, when you will have to teach on such fictional works as Aesop's Fables, The Brothers Grimm, Romeo and Juliette, The Odessy and the Illiad. Part of teaching is teaching children about fictional stories (like A Visit from St. Nicholas) and teaching them about real people (like our Presidents and other news makers).
Schaeffer got off the school bus later that day, dragging her backpack in the mud, tears in her angry little eyes.
“She yelled at me, ‘Why did you lie?’” recalled Jamey’s mother, Elizabeth. “‘Why didn’t you tell me Santa Claus died?’”
Elizabeth Schaeffer said she was appalled by Farrisi’s bluntness.
I hope you are happy Ms. Farrisi....you're actions interfered in this parent's relationship with her child. Pray that no one ever does this to you and your children (should you have any).
What's worse is that now, Ms. Farrisi is trying to cover her tracks - she knows she was wrong!
“I did not tell the students Santa Claus was dead,” she explained. “I said there was a man named Nickolas of Myrna who died in 343 A.D., upon whom the Santa Claus myth (is based).”
However the kids in the class tell a different story...
“The teacher stopped reading and told us no one comes down the chimney,” Jamey said, curling into a ball on the couch, bracing her chin on her knees, her voice shrinking away like melting ice cream. “She said our parents buy the presents, not Santa.”
Here is a news flash for all of you teachers out there! Your role (in the parent/teacher/child triumverate) is to partner with, not usurp, the parents authority. You are to teach my child reading, writing, science and math! If my child believes in Santa, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Buddah, Allah Jesus Christ or whomever - it is not your job to interject YOUR VALUE SYSTEM into the way I am raising my child! It is not your business to tell my child that his/her beliefs are "a myth".
Ms Farrisi, you stepped way over the line here. It is not your place to override the parents of these children! You owe the parents of these students a big apology.
I hope you are happy, Ms. Farrisi. You ruined this Christmas for these children. I hope you sleep with a clean conscience tonight!
Theresa Farrisi stood in for (Jamey) Schaeffer’s regular music teacher one day last week. One of her assignments was to read Clement C. Moore’s famous poem, “A Visit from Saint Nicholas” to a first-grade class at Lickdale Elementary School.
“The poem has great literary value, but it goes against my conscience to teach something which I know to be false to children, who are impressionable,” said Farrisi, 43, of Myerstown. “It’s a story. I taught it as a story. There’s no real person called Santa Claus living at the North Pole.”
Well you'd better get out of teaching now, Ms. Farrisi. If you have such a problem teaching this "false" story to children, there will come a time in your teaching career, when you will have to teach on such fictional works as Aesop's Fables, The Brothers Grimm, Romeo and Juliette, The Odessy and the Illiad. Part of teaching is teaching children about fictional stories (like A Visit from St. Nicholas) and teaching them about real people (like our Presidents and other news makers).
Schaeffer got off the school bus later that day, dragging her backpack in the mud, tears in her angry little eyes.
“She yelled at me, ‘Why did you lie?’” recalled Jamey’s mother, Elizabeth. “‘Why didn’t you tell me Santa Claus died?’”
Elizabeth Schaeffer said she was appalled by Farrisi’s bluntness.
I hope you are happy Ms. Farrisi....you're actions interfered in this parent's relationship with her child. Pray that no one ever does this to you and your children (should you have any).
What's worse is that now, Ms. Farrisi is trying to cover her tracks - she knows she was wrong!
“I did not tell the students Santa Claus was dead,” she explained. “I said there was a man named Nickolas of Myrna who died in 343 A.D., upon whom the Santa Claus myth (is based).”
However the kids in the class tell a different story...
“The teacher stopped reading and told us no one comes down the chimney,” Jamey said, curling into a ball on the couch, bracing her chin on her knees, her voice shrinking away like melting ice cream. “She said our parents buy the presents, not Santa.”
Here is a news flash for all of you teachers out there! Your role (in the parent/teacher/child triumverate) is to partner with, not usurp, the parents authority. You are to teach my child reading, writing, science and math! If my child believes in Santa, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Buddah, Allah Jesus Christ or whomever - it is not your job to interject YOUR VALUE SYSTEM into the way I am raising my child! It is not your business to tell my child that his/her beliefs are "a myth".
Ms Farrisi, you stepped way over the line here. It is not your place to override the parents of these children! You owe the parents of these students a big apology.
I hope you are happy, Ms. Farrisi. You ruined this Christmas for these children. I hope you sleep with a clean conscience tonight!
Friday, December 23, 2005
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, the King has no clothes...oh, and you're broke!
I came across this article reading from World Net Daily Devvy Kidd's column . Kidd makes the point that I've made for years that taking money from you to give to them is sinful, wrong , evil and immoral. That if the Feds (and states) left us alone, the American people, the most generous people in history, would give to the Salvation Armies of the world that do a FAR better and moral job of caring for the poor than the Feds or states haver ever or could ever accomplish. EVER! Another article about private vs. government charity here and especially here , which is real vs. false, destructive charity.
But, the article I refer to is one that Dr. Walter E. Williams has also written about in this article . The real deficit is not $8,000,000,000,000 . It's so large that estimates run from a low of $37,000,000,000,000 to a high of $75,000,000,000,000. And Social Security is a mere percentage. Medicare and Medicaid are the monsters that will sink us all.And the new Medicare Prescription Drug Act will add another $5-7,000,000,000,000 to that during my lifetime.
All Congressmen (Reps and Senators), all have access to this information. There will be no surprise. It's coming for sure. We've had a few opportunities to stop this. We may, repeat MAY have just one more.
We do have a few lessons from history. After the French Revolution there was an currency (economic) crisis. There was at least one currency exchange. It didn't work. There came a man who promised to end this crisis. His name was Napoleon Bonaparte.
After WWI the huge war reparations were crushing Germany. The government solution? Print more deutsche marks. Inflate their way out of the debt. And inflation reigned down on all the citizens. One incident I read was that a man in Germany had saved enough to send his son to the university. Four full years. When the inflation hit, all his son's college fund could buy was just one meal when he was ready to go to college.
And government is not the solution.That's like asking Ted Bundy to run a dating service.
If you think for a moment that governemnt is the answer, see how the Feds took a recession in 1929 and turned it into a depression here . Oh, and by the way, the same article shows how the Feds brought about the original market correction (called Black Monday, 28 October, 1929). It's a complete read, but well worth the time to set history straight.
But, the article I refer to is one that Dr. Walter E. Williams has also written about in this article . The real deficit is not $8,000,000,000,000 . It's so large that estimates run from a low of $37,000,000,000,000 to a high of $75,000,000,000,000. And Social Security is a mere percentage. Medicare and Medicaid are the monsters that will sink us all.And the new Medicare Prescription Drug Act will add another $5-7,000,000,000,000 to that during my lifetime.
All Congressmen (Reps and Senators), all have access to this information. There will be no surprise. It's coming for sure. We've had a few opportunities to stop this. We may, repeat MAY have just one more.
We do have a few lessons from history. After the French Revolution there was an currency (economic) crisis. There was at least one currency exchange. It didn't work. There came a man who promised to end this crisis. His name was Napoleon Bonaparte.
After WWI the huge war reparations were crushing Germany. The government solution? Print more deutsche marks. Inflate their way out of the debt. And inflation reigned down on all the citizens. One incident I read was that a man in Germany had saved enough to send his son to the university. Four full years. When the inflation hit, all his son's college fund could buy was just one meal when he was ready to go to college.
And government is not the solution.That's like asking Ted Bundy to run a dating service.
If you think for a moment that governemnt is the answer, see how the Feds took a recession in 1929 and turned it into a depression here . Oh, and by the way, the same article shows how the Feds brought about the original market correction (called Black Monday, 28 October, 1929). It's a complete read, but well worth the time to set history straight.
And the reason I buy malts is...(or The Republic morphs into a democracy)
I've mentioned Dr. Walter E. Williams many times before (The E. being quite important). He is an economics professor at George Mason University. He has a talent to take complex economic principles and make them fairly simple and understandable.
In his recent article (The consumer rip-off ) he started me thinking about a conversation I had with my deeply committed socialist buddy (his answer to the disaster and economic tsunami called Social Security? An estate tax at 100%. He hasn't come up with a solution to its dwarfing counterpart Medicare...and now its bastard brother the Prescription Drug Act). Anyhow, Dr. Williams talks about the economic concept of large but narrowly defined benefits vs. small but largely dispersed costs. He uses sugar and dairy interests to show that a few people (sugar beet growers and dairy farmers) get huge benefits from price controls and tariffs but we, the consumers, pay more for the products, but not enough for us to organize and change the law. But read the article. He does a much better job.
So, here we have two special interest groups. Groups that work against the interests of you and me. We have to counter with a group that will look out for our interests that will counter these specific assemblages.Which brings me back to my socialist friend.
Painting the walls in his garage a few years ago, we started talking about the Constitution. His take, of course,is that the Constitution is a living document. That the Founders could never have predicted or seen an economy like this, or whatever. I said that the Constitution was never about economics but was about the hearts of men. It was meant to counter the evil tendency of men to accumulate and concentrate power.
We talked about the most infamous tyrants of history (He was shocked when I told him that Stalin killed more people than Hitler. And that 8,000,000 Ukrainians starved to death thanks to the failure of central planning (read concentrated power) under Stalin. And Mao Tse Tung killed more then Stalin and Hitler together, including starving to death 20,000,000 Chinese in the failed Great Leap Forward-central planning). I then asked what did Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, Mohmar Khadafi have in common? Centralizeded out that he made the comment that we had to get corporations out of government. I said that was simple...get government out of corporations so they don't have to try to protect their interests.
In his recent article (The consumer rip-off ) he started me thinking about a conversation I had with my deeply committed socialist buddy (his answer to the disaster and economic tsunami called Social Security? An estate tax at 100%. He hasn't come up with a solution to its dwarfing counterpart Medicare...and now its bastard brother the Prescription Drug Act). Anyhow, Dr. Williams talks about the economic concept of large but narrowly defined benefits vs. small but largely dispersed costs. He uses sugar and dairy interests to show that a few people (sugar beet growers and dairy farmers) get huge benefits from price controls and tariffs but we, the consumers, pay more for the products, but not enough for us to organize and change the law. But read the article. He does a much better job.
So, here we have two special interest groups. Groups that work against the interests of you and me. We have to counter with a group that will look out for our interests that will counter these specific assemblages.Which brings me back to my socialist friend.
Painting the walls in his garage a few years ago, we started talking about the Constitution. His take, of course,is that the Constitution is a living document. That the Founders could never have predicted or seen an economy like this, or whatever. I said that the Constitution was never about economics but was about the hearts of men. It was meant to counter the evil tendency of men to accumulate and concentrate power.
We talked about the most infamous tyrants of history (He was shocked when I told him that Stalin killed more people than Hitler. And that 8,000,000 Ukrainians starved to death thanks to the failure of central planning (read concentrated power) under Stalin. And Mao Tse Tung killed more then Stalin and Hitler together, including starving to death 20,000,000 Chinese in the fail
I then ask
I said no, that's not the reason. The reason that these people and groups were trying to buy influence was that there was influence to be bought. That the 10th Amendment was there to make sure that there was NO influence to be bought. That a Congressman could only say to a potential influence buyer "Well, I'll take your campaign contribution, but of course you know that my Oath of Office ONLY allows me to do what's outlin
And so, we now have competing interests that reflect the will of the majority, a democracy, with no Constitutional control. Where the 2nd Amendment is quite clear, I ne
So, why do I buy malts? Because there are malts to buy because there is a free market for malt suppliers and buyers. And I like them.
However, I buy these malts legally...at least for now.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Separation of Church and State Redux
I received an interesting email today that dovetails into post here regarding the ACLU's perpetual lawsuits against the 10 Commandments. Did you know that each state constitution acknowledges God? That's right....every single state constitution makes some reference to God, thanking God for His blessings and His grace and His mercy....Don't believe me? Try this....
California 1879, Preamble. We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom...
Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy...
Illinois 1870, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors...
Maryland 1776, Preamble. We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...
New York 1846, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom,in order to secure its blessings...
Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble. We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance.
and finally our very own Minnesota, 1857, Preamble. We, the people of theState of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings...
Notice a pattern? All of the states I listed as examples are some of the BLUEST of the blue states and some have been around since the beginning of the country! This, along with the writings of our founding fathers tell us what the ACLU and their supporters choose to ignore...that this country was indeed founded on a Judeo/Christian faith. One thing is abundantly clear to me after reading this. We, the people, in order to maintain this perfect union, need to make sure that we do not allow the ACLU to write God out of our history!
California 1879, Preamble. We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom...
Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy...
Illinois 1870, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors...
Maryland 1776, Preamble. We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...
New York 1846, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom,in order to secure its blessings...
Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble. We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance.
and finally our very own Minnesota, 1857, Preamble. We, the people of theState of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings...
Notice a pattern? All of the states I listed as examples are some of the BLUEST of the blue states and some have been around since the beginning of the country! This, along with the writings of our founding fathers tell us what the ACLU and their supporters choose to ignore...that this country was indeed founded on a Judeo/Christian faith. One thing is abundantly clear to me after reading this. We, the people, in order to maintain this perfect union, need to make sure that we do not allow the ACLU to write God out of our history!
Large government-writ small
Tip O'Neill (former Speaker of the House, now deceased) once said "All politics are local." Oh, how true!
One of my friends is heavily involved in politics in Prior Lake. In the run-up to the last election he and others organized a citizens group that was deeply concerned that the local politicos seemed to have forgotten that they were elected to govern with and for the people, not rule over them. A city hall with a lunch room costing nearly $500,000- an edifice to the magnificance of the reigning elected was one item that stood out to me. The huge run-up in tax revenues (that the locals blame on anything, everyone else save them). It sounded SO much like what happens in St. Paul and Wash.D.C.
My friend told me that when property values exploded (as they are want to do in Scott County) the then city council and mayor just reduced the mil rate so that even with an increase in property values the tax payer didn't pay any more in taxes as the tax rate was cut. Now, that's MY idea of governing wisely. Does anyone remember the huge state surpluses (aka overtaxed) in the late 90's? And Jason Lewis warned us that the state would create new programs to soak up all that extra money. And it was so.And the citizens would then be doubly taxed as they didn't get their money back and would now have to pay to keep ALL those extra programs up and running as we know that programs are never cut nor ever eliminated. And we then had the recent deficits. We have never, ever had a tax problem locally, state-wide or nationally. We have always had a spending problem. We have never, ever, nor will we ever be undertaxed. Ever. Unless you're a left wing weenie. And then everyone else, especially the "rich", are all certainly undertaxed! And then all tax cuts are too large and never warranted and no tax is ever big enough.
And so it will be with all these increased revenues from higher property values. My Mom lives in Hennepin County. And I calculated that she will pay ANOTHER $1,000 in property taxes. She's a widow, in her late 70's. All of her children have been out of government schools for 35 years. And her city built a new city hall reffered to as "The Taj Mahal".
Plus, her city council also passed a smoking ban...and restaurants have been laying off employess ever since. The local school district once had a parking place where I started to park, but it was reserved for the the "Diversity Coordinator".
And do you think, for a moment, that my Mom's city council, or any other city council, will not take the chance to grab more of their citizens' money? Does Dracula ever pass up an exposed neck?
Large government, writ small.
Oh, and by the way, the Taj Mahal is NOT a palace or a residence. It's a tomb. A mausoleum.
Rather fitting, I'd say.
One of my friends is heavily involved in politics in Prior Lake. In the run-up to the last election he and others organized a citizens group that was deeply concerned that the local politicos seemed to have forgotten that they were elected to govern with and for the people, not rule over them. A city hall with a lunch room costing nearly $500,000- an edifice to the magnificance of the reigning elected was one item that stood out to me. The huge run-up in tax revenues (that the locals blame on anything, everyone else save them). It sounded SO much like what happens in St. Paul and Wash.D.C.
My friend told me that when property values exploded (as they are want to do in Scott County) the then city council and mayor just reduced the mil rate so that even with an increase in property values the tax payer didn't pay any more in taxes as the tax rate was cut. Now, that's MY idea of governing wisely. Does anyone remember the huge state surpluses (aka overtaxed) in the late 90's? And Jason Lewis warned us that the state would create new programs to soak up all that extra money. And it was so.And the citizens would then be doubly taxed as they didn't get their money back and would now have to pay to keep ALL those extra programs up and running as we know that programs are never cut nor ever eliminated. And we then had the recent deficits. We have never, ever had a tax problem locally, state-wide or nationally. We have always had a spending problem. We have never, ever, nor will we ever be undertaxed. Ever. Unless you're a left wing weenie. And then everyone else, especially the "rich", are all certainly undertaxed! And then all tax cuts are too large and never warranted and no tax is ever big enough.
And so it will be with all these increased revenues from higher property values. My Mom lives in Hennepin County. And I calculated that she will pay ANOTHER $1,000 in property taxes. She's a widow, in her late 70's. All of her children have been out of government schools for 35 years. And her city built a new city hall reffered to as "The Taj Mahal".
Plus, her city council also passed a smoking ban...and restaurants have been laying off employess ever since. The local school district once had a parking place where I started to park, but it was reserved for the the "Diversity Coordinator".
And do you think, for a moment, that my Mom's city council, or any other city council, will not take the chance to grab more of their citizens' money? Does Dracula ever pass up an exposed neck?
Large government, writ small.
Oh, and by the way, the Taj Mahal is NOT a palace or a residence. It's a tomb. A mausoleum.
Rather fitting, I'd say.
Wile E. Coyote:Genius. And counsleor to Howard Dean and Sen. Reid
I'm a huge Warner Bros. cartoon fan (1956 and earlier only).
So, when I got the following from the WSJ, I read it with great amusement:
So, when I got the following from the WSJ, I read it with great amusement:
Blogger John Hinderaker likened the Dems to Wile E. Coyote, the hapless vulpine Looney Tune whose elaborate schemes to catch the Road Runner always blow up in his face. As the Looney Tunes Web site notes, "Wile E.'s ineptitude, possibly a by-product of his distracted obsession with catching Road Runner, is compounded only by the Acme company's products--which may work for other customers, but seem never to work for Wile E., who repeatedly risks life and limb counting on their effectiveness."
Hinderaker's observation brought a fascinating response from reader Stephen Fossati:
For the better part of ten years I had the privilege of working closely with Wile's creator Chuck Jones and in fact produced and co-wrote Chuck's final Roadrunner cartoon in 1994, so I would humbly offer that I am a fair authority on said erstwhile coyote.
Having spoken with Chuck about Wile more times than I can count, I can say with great conviction that your suggestion that the Murtha, Dean, Kerry, Boxer et al, position with regards to the GWOT and the war in Iraq, is appropriately analogous to Wile and to his inumerable [sic], ill-considered and near fatally-flawed plans to catch the Roadrunner--a good many of which resulted in him falling off of a cliff.
Chuck defined Wile in the words of George Santayana who said: "A fanatic is one who redoubles his effort when he has forgotten his aim." Assuming that the Dems' aims are to regain control of the House, the Senate and the White House and based upon their seemingly fevered attempts to discredit President Bush by mis-representing the success of the war, advocating for our withdrawal/surrender, and purposefully undermining our efforts/abilities to wage war on an enemy unlike any we have faced before, I think it's fair to say that the Democrats clearly meet Santayana's definition of a fanatic. And since it is Santayana's definition of a fanatic with which Wile's own creator described him, I would conclude that your comparison of our luckless, over-zealous and too-clever-by-half coyote to the leaders of the Democratic party, is not only correct but painfully (for the Dems), astute.
Hinderaker adds: "Remember how Wile viewed even his misadventures as evidence of his superior intellect?" He reproduces a picture of the not-so-wily Wile E. holding a sign identifying himself as a GENIUS. It reminds us of a DemocraticUnderground post we quoted in 2003:
I would dare to assume that most of us here are in the upper 1%-20% of the population intelligence-wise. We must come to the realization that the majority of the population is in the lower 80% to 99% percent of the bell-curve. WE are not the norm. The Republicans understand that the average American is not very bright. They cater and pander to the masses. The Democratic Party tries to appeal to the population about "issues" that these people just don't understand.
As we noted then, these guys think it an impressive act of cognition to "come to the realization" that the majority of Americans are below the 80th percentile. We like the way that rolls out: Wile (D.) Coyote, Super Genius!
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Merry Christmas ALCU!
Well Scrooge visited the ACLU today, in the form of a ruling from the 6th US Court of Appeals. The court was ruling on a case that the ACLU had brought against Mercer County KY. The ruling (reported here) was a complete repudiation of the ACLU and the supposed "separation of church and state". In writing for the 3-0 majority, Judge Richard Suhrheinrich said the ACLU's "repeated reference 'to the separation of church and state' ... has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state." Judge Suhrheinrich also wrote that a reasonable person would appreciate the role that religion played as appropriate and that "The ACLU, an organization whose mission is 'to ensure that ... the government [is kept] out of the religion business,' does not embody the reasonable person."
The display in question, featured a copy of the Declaration of Independence, the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and other historical documents, along with the 10 Commandments. Displays such as this have long been considered "acceptable" displays in a government setting.
Kudos to American Center for Law and Justice and their attorneys for fighting for the civil rights of a group of Americans that the ACLU would just as soon strip of their rights. While I have no doubt that this will go before the Supreme Court (2 Appeals Courts have now ruled in favor of this kind of display while one has ruled against it), it is nice to see someone fighting the good fight!
The display in question, featured a copy of the Declaration of Independence, the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and other historical documents, along with the 10 Commandments. Displays such as this have long been considered "acceptable" displays in a government setting.
Kudos to American Center for Law and Justice and their attorneys for fighting for the civil rights of a group of Americans that the ACLU would just as soon strip of their rights. While I have no doubt that this will go before the Supreme Court (2 Appeals Courts have now ruled in favor of this kind of display while one has ruled against it), it is nice to see someone fighting the good fight!
How important is local politics?
Most blogs seem to cover national and maybe state wide politics, but the insanity that pervades national politics can be found even down to the city level. Case in point....
The City Council of Prior Lake Minnesota has been, for the last year or so, embroiled in controversy after controversy. It was so bad, that in the last city wide election, all incumbants running for re-election were defeated at the polls. The newest controversy centers around a decision to back the local indian tribe putting several hundred acres of land into "trust" meaning the land is taken off of the public tax rolls. This led to some rather heated discussions in the letters to the editor section of the local paper (which is where yours truly heard about the brouhaha). The letters lead one city council member to write in to try to defend their vote. Now the letter was your standard "we felt our actions were in the best interests of the city", but what struck me as out of line was when the council member said that the disagreement was serving as a "thin veil of the real underlying problem of racism and socio-economic bias"! WHOA!!!! Well, that has set the local population abuzz anew and I have to agree. Since when does a disagreement over property taxes become a "racial" issue?
This is still playing out and probably will continue to do so until the new city council is seated next month. Meanwhile, you have to ask yourself, how are we ever going to become a "colorblind" society if politicians on all levels continue to play the "race card"every time there is a policy disagreement!
The City Council of Prior Lake Minnesota has been, for the last year or so, embroiled in controversy after controversy. It was so bad, that in the last city wide election, all incumbants running for re-election were defeated at the polls. The newest controversy centers around a decision to back the local indian tribe putting several hundred acres of land into "trust" meaning the land is taken off of the public tax rolls. This led to some rather heated discussions in the letters to the editor section of the local paper (which is where yours truly heard about the brouhaha). The letters lead one city council member to write in to try to defend their vote. Now the letter was your standard "we felt our actions were in the best interests of the city", but what struck me as out of line was when the council member said that the disagreement was serving as a "thin veil of the real underlying problem of racism and socio-economic bias"! WHOA!!!! Well, that has set the local population abuzz anew and I have to agree. Since when does a disagreement over property taxes become a "racial" issue?
This is still playing out and probably will continue to do so until the new city council is seated next month. Meanwhile, you have to ask yourself, how are we ever going to become a "colorblind" society if politicians on all levels continue to play the "race card"every time there is a policy disagreement!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)