Thursday, December 3, 2009
Monday, August 31, 2009
The End of Meritocracy
The Today show has hired Jenna Bush Hager to do a monthly feature story on education. This seemingly innocuous announcement prompted one of the sillier recent outbursts of liberal hand-wringing. The New York Times's Opinionator blog collected some of the left-wing commentary under the title "There Goes the Meritocracy." If irony was intended it was too subtle for me to pick up. Rather, the Times seems to take seriously various liberal commentators' claims that NBC's hiring of Ms. Hager, the author of two best-selling books for children, has some baleful significance: it's a sign that our nation is in its "late empire" phase, with "white Russians" dominating our political and media classes, and a symptom of our "national disease." Above all, the fact that NBC hired Ms. Hager indicates that our "great meritocracy" is a fraud. If Ms. Hager had been hired to perform neurosurgery, this hand-wringing about "meritocracy" might have some force. But doing a once-a-month feature on a soft-news TV show? Good Lord, get a grip! The old sock-puppet Glenn Greenwald, who apparently is still around, uses Hager's new job as the occasion for a broadside against the political and media industries: That's almost clever, except that if you're going to list politicians who have no apparent claim on office other than their names, it is ludicrous to omit Ted, Joe and Patrick Kennedy; not to mention Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Andrew Cuomo, and numerous others on both sides of the aisle. But what, really, is the point? It's true that there are quite a few politicians who are the sons or daughters of politicians, but so what? That is true of most occupations. If your father is a doctor, you are more likely to become a doctor. If your father was a lawyer, you are more likely to become a lawyer. It happens a lot. I've seen no data suggesting that it is more common in politics (or journalism) than anywhere else. And politics is relentlessly competitive; even the worst candidates, like Joseph and Patrick Kennedy, take office only if most voters vote for them. Two of the liberals quoted in the Times story somehow bring the conversation around to Sonia Sotomayer. It still isn't clear to me how she relates to Jenna Hager. Seemingly the idea is that because she came from an undistinguished background, we conservatives were obligated to support her nomination. Sure: just like liberals backed Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito, right? The TImes gives the last word to the ever-hysterical Andrew Sullivan, who attacks the "nepotism" of Hager's hiring as symptomatic of our "late empire" status. I'm sure grand theories have been hung on a more slender thread, but I can't think when offhand. Actually, though, it isn't nepotism. Neither President Bush nor any other of Jenna's relatives works for NBC News, and I think it's a safe bet that nearly all of the relevant people at the Today show and NBC detest Jenna's father. I haven't read Sullivan for a long time, but the snippet quoted by the Times reminds me how unintentionally entertaining he can be: because NBC is hiring Jenna Hager--hey, he drew the connection, I didn't--the United States is on the verge of becoming "17th century Spain." Oh, sure. We understand, Andrew. We think you're sane, really we do. So: do we have a meritocracy? Of course we do. If you doubt that, apply to medical school. Or try to rise in a sales organization without, you know, making sales. Is our meritocracy imperfect? Of course. Like every other human institution. Is Russia's meritocracy perfect? France's? Cuba's? Is it a good thing to have a father who is President? Of course. Do you suppose Malia Obama will have some good opportunities one of these days? (As, by the way, her mother has already.) On the other hand, does having a President for a father guarantee success in life? Amazingly enough, in our great meritocracy it doesn't. Our republic has survived many ups and downs. I predict, confidently, that it will survive Jenna Hager's monthly reports on education issues.They should convene a panel for the next "Meet the Press" with Jenna Bush Hager, Luke Russert, Liz Cheney, Megan McCain and Jonah Goldberg, and they should have Chris Wallace moderate it. They can all bash affirmative action and talk about how vitally important it is that the U.S. remain a Great Meritocracy because it's really unfair for anything other than merit to determine position and employment. They can interview Lisa Murkowski, Evan Bayh, Jeb Bush, Bob Casey, Mark Pryor, Jay Rockefeller, Dan Lipinksi, and Harold Ford, Jr. about personal responsibility and the virtues of self-sufficiency.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Times Touts Economic Momentum
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Work It, Girl
There were a lot of high profile, potentially world-changing stories that came across the news wires this week. The stories ran the gamut from the sublime to the ridiculous. In Iran, people have been taking to the streets in protest of their presidential election shenanigans. Many of them have been murdered. After the 2000 American presidential election, the worst example of “protest” was Al Gore growing a beard. In North Korea, resident madman Kim Jong Il is threatening to launch a nuclear war, because it is much more important to rattle a saber instead of say, feeding your people. Oh, and President Barack Obama fired an Inspector General who was investigating one of his supporters. Nothing to see there. Naturally, one would think that the above stories would be of utmost importance. However, one would be wrong. See, there is a much more pressing issue that affects each and every person on this big blue marble we call Earth. At least according to many media sources, which buried the stories mentioned above but highlighted the one mentioned below. The Council of Fashion Designers of America held its annual awards on Monday night. Who is the Council of Fashion Designers of America? Members of the Council are like the Jedi Council, but instead of lightsabers, they wield hatpins. They protect and defend the rights of clothes-wearing citizens everywhere. In short, they are the fashion police. Most of the awards were bestowed upon the giants of the industry. Apparently, the CFDA believes that First Lady Michelle Obama is one of these giants. That’s right; Michelle Obama – the woman who wore the curtain from the old Merv Griffin Show to the Inauguration – is being recognized as a fashion icon. Michelle Obama, are they kidding? Last week, this woman was seen wearing something from the Cyndi Lauper Collection: a white top with multi-colored fabric wrapped around her stomach. It was an abomination that even Peg Bundy would not be caught in at her insane, inbred family reunion. What’s next for the First Lady, feathered boas? (For more, including pictures, see this previous post.
Obama and Media Laugh Together
At the 65th Annual Radio and Television Correspondents Dinner this week, President Barack Obama bragged about his "celebrity status" and joked about being in bed with the media who gave him that status. In a tasteless joke, Obama said after "tossing and turning" he "rolled over and asked Brian Williams what he thought."
Our president is joking about being in bed – literally – with the anchor of NBC News. Ha ha. That's hilarious. And the state-run media laughed on cue.
But not everyone is laughing. Despite the love affair the media has with Obama that inspired the editor of the San Francisco Chronicle to suggest they "get a room," and Newsweek's editor calling him "god," Rasmussen reports that the media-made celebrity has finally fallen out of favor with America – more of whom strongly disapprove of him than approve.
Maybe some of those who are awakening are, uh – were – owners of car dealerships before Obama came in and took them over. Wasn't it hysterical how the "powerful celebrity" Obama joked about giving everyone a car company under their chair? "Ha ha. Look at how powerful I am, watch me take over the free market and laugh about it." And the "watchdog" media howled.
Then Obama asked himself: "WWLD?" What would a wise Latina do? Ha ha. Racism. Isn't that funny? His nominee for the Supreme Court is a racist. But because she downgrades white men and non-Latina women, she gets a free pass to the highest court in our land.
Then he joked about how Sonia Sotomayor wants to rip off the blindfold of justice and make her policy from the bench by way of empathy (but he understands how we feel about that.) Empathy. Emotion. Bias. Just what you want when it comes to the rule of law. Rule in favor of the one for whom you feel most sorry.
That's a lot like the Senate Judiciary Committee, which wants to give their favorite politically correct people more legal protection than the rest of us. In a hearing this Thursday, watch the Democrats as they clamor to give homosexual activists and other sexual deviances – itemized in an APA list of "sexual orientations" that's 547 long – special favor. Forget about equal protection. Forget about free speech. Their goal is to give more legal protection to the ones the Democrat majority likes the most. The ones they must reward for their campaign contributions.
Barack Obama wants to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. So much for standing for marriage between one man and one woman as he promised during the campaign. And while marriage is under attack, in the Midwest and especially in the Northeast many are asking, "What can we do"
Now, Obama and the Democrats are trying to ram through socialized medicine to take our minds off the trillions they've already added to the national debt.
Nothing takes your mind off credit card debt more than going shopping!
Maybe Obama's poll numbers will fall even more when doctors see an end to their freedom of conscience as this administration tries to turn them into executioners by forcing them to perform abortions or leave medicine. Maybe they'll drop even further when America waits in long lines for health care like they do government cheese.
And now ABC is moving into the White House to film an infomercial to help force Obama's multi-trillion dollar socialized medicine down our throats.
After Obama's own personal "Saturday Night Live" Routine, not surprisingly, the media stood to give Obama a standing ovation, just like they do every day with the news they "report." It was a chance for them all to sit back and laugh at America.
But this isn't funny any more.
Monday, June 22, 2009
NYT/CBS Poll "Generated" to Show Americans Want Health Care
Realizing that Barack Obama's healthcare initiative has hit some roadblocks in Congress, the good folks at CBS News and the New York Times figured they'd help it along by creating a new poll on the subject that WAY oversampled people who voted for Obama.
Although the then junior senator from Illinois received 53 percent of the votes last November, NYT/CBS surveyed almost twice as many Obama voters as McCain voters.
Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.
Actually, as Bruce Kesler cleverly discovered, what the poll really found was that most Obama voters support substantial changes to healthcare and are willing to pay higher taxes for a government run system:
[A]ccording to the actual poll data, of the 73% of respondents who said they voted in 2008 only 34% voted for McCain and 66% for Obama.
As can be plainly seen on page 7 of the poll's data, only 73 percent of respondents divulged who they voted for last November. 48 percent said Obama, 25 percent McCain.
What this means is this poll surveyed 66 percent Obama supporters versus 34 percent McCain.
As the final tally last year was 53 percent to 46 percent, this poll WAY oversampled Obama voters.
And you wonder why the survey found so much support for Obamacare?
Honestly, stuff like this should be illegal and any news organization found doing it should be significantly fined.
In any industry you could name, such deception of the public would meet with very serious consequences.
Why are so-called news outlets allowed to get away with such obvious deceit with total impunity?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The Fix Is In
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Violence In Iran: Can You Export Democracy?
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Who's to Blame?
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
One of the Largest Muslim Nations in the World? I Don't Think So.
Isn't it funny that liberals have spent years falling all over themselves to protest when people call this a Christian nation, but now -- we now have the most liberal President in our nation's history declaring that we're a Muslim nation. The reason this has been called a Christian nation is because it was originally populated by Christians seeking religious liberty, since it was founded by Christians, and since the population is still heavily Christian. The reason we're now a Muslim country? Ehr...hard to say. We don't have an accurate count of how many Muslims we have in this country, but the number is generally thought to be under 3 million and many of them are from the Nation of Islam, which most real Muslims consider to be heretical. As President Obama prepared to leave Washington to fly to the Middle East, he conducted several television and radio interviews at the White House to frame the goals for a five-day trip, including the highly-anticipated speech Thursday at Cairo University in Egypt. In an interview with Laura Haim on Canal Plus, a French television station, Mr. Obama noted that the United States also could be considered as "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." He sought to downplay the expectations of the speech, but he said he hoped the address would raise awareness about Muslims. God bless the Muslims who are here in this country, but just to be crystal clear, we're not "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world" nor are we ever going to be "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." We're also not one of the "largest Muslim countries in the world" even if you count the Muslims in the nation of Islam. Here's a list of the world's largest Muslim populations: In other words, this is typical Obama. He says whatever he thinks his audience, which in this case is the "Muslim world," wants to hear with no regard to facts or logic. Since he's giving a big speech in Egypt, America is "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." If he thinks you're concerned about spending, he's the guy you need to cut spending. If you want lots of expensive, new government programs, he's the man for that, too. If you're anti-war, he's the guy to reverse Bush's policies! If you're not, he's the guy who'll be smart enough to quietly keep them in place. He gets away with this because the mainstream media has his back. When he makes the sort of mistakes they'd harp on for weeks with a Republican, they either give it a brief, perfunctory mention while spinning for him as best they can or they just ignore it entirely. When he breaks his campaign promises, and he does that constantly, the media shrugs and moves on. When he makes huge gaffes, they yawn and pretend to be disinterested. Essentially, Obama's playing the role of an incompetent, batty Soviet premier while the media is playing the role of Pravda. That's a big part of the reason why the MSM is going out of business ever more rapidly and why Obama has been such a historical disaster as President, because he's constantly being given free passes on these huge screw-ups.
Illegal Takeover? They Don't Report; You Decide
The Obama administration’s arguably unconstitutional and potentially illegal makeover/takeover of General Motors and Chrysler hit a legal road block on June 8, when Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued a stay preventing Team Obama’s plan to sell Chrysler to the Italian automaker Fiat. This speed bump was a great opportunity for the media to pay attention to objections to the White House’s reckless executive-branch manipulation of the auto business. Or not. President Bush and his team were regularly savaged by the media elite if they so much as sniffed a hint of evasion over the rule of law and the bounds of constitutional authority in fighting terrorism. So why is President Obama’s unprecedented intervention in the auto industry, including a TARP-fund bailout expressly ruled out by Congress, all but ignored? Even with the Supreme Court order, the nightly news shows of CBS and NBC gave the decision just a few seconds of air time, the equivalent of a stifled yawn, and never went anywhere near describing the strange bankruptcy proceedings the Obama administration has cooked up to manipulate the industry to its liking.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Personal Attacks From The Left
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
The Moderate Myth
We have been told that there are three major food groups in the political spectrum in this country; the liberal left, the conservative right and the largest group, the moderate middle. Repeatedly, in recent months we have been told that a failure to reach out to those moderates will leave the Republican Party and/or Conservatives a permanent minority. This is the rationale given for the Democrat-lite, watered down message the RNC and such stellar organizations as the RMSP have offered the American public in recent years.
Well, the results of those messages of moderation are hard to dispute. The results have been catastrophic – and still we are told, we must moderate even more. Moderates don’t win elections. Moderates merely win the approval of other moderates – and sometimes not even that. Moderate’s moderate John McCain could not even win the approval of uber-moderate Colin Powell as proof of that failure.
The three part premise is itself incorrect. There are not three camps in this country, but four. There are the committed leftists, which entirely encapsulates the Democratic Party. There are the committed Conservatives, who find themselves mostly identified with the Republican Party – even though that party does not wish to identify with them.
There are the moderates – centrists who are willing to weigh each decision around the proposal, “Why can’t we all just get along?”
But there is a fourth group, and that is the largest and most important group of all. That group is the Uninvolved. It is not the liberals or the conservatives who decide elections, and certainly not the moderates. It is the uninvolved who decide the outcome.
These are the American citizens who can tell you in great detail who was voted off the Survivor series this week, and why; and yet could not name today the congressman they voted for last November. The uninvolved knows pop culture, the latest rising star in Hollywood, who is sleeping with whom, and who is, according to the tabloids, seeking divorce. The uninvolved has made TMZ more popular than organized religion.
The uninvolved, as demonstrated by recent figures, no longer read newspapers or watch network news. What current events and political opinion they manage to assimilate comes mostly from popular culture, television sitcoms or Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart. They know that Dick Cheney was evil from bits and digs they heard on The View. In short, the uninvolved are ignorant, and perfectly happy to stay that way.
It is the uninvolved voter – because ignorance does not prevent them from going to the polls on Election Day and voting – that the right must court – not the moderate. The key to winning elections is to reach the uninvolved voter – to give the uninvolved voter a reason to vote for a conservative – rather than to try to court the flotsam and jetsam of moderation.
Last fall I had a co-worker tell me, “All that I know is that my 401k made money when Clinton was in office and lost money under Bush.” Little did he know the great profundity he uttered with that statement. Without realizing it, he was stating a great truth – a truth that runs throughout our society today.
That was, in fact, all that he knew!
Like most uninvolved Americans, he knew nothing about the Community Reinvestment Act, or congressional pressure on banks to make risky loans. He was completely unaware of massive campaign contributions to congressmen from those same financial institutions who were looting the system of hundreds of millions of dollars – while driving those same institutions into financial ruin.
Oh, to be sure, he was outraged when the Bush Administration gave billions to those financial institutions and then the executives took huge bonuses. That was news he could not possibly miss – and knowing the root causes was unnecessary.
Like most uninvolved Americans he was outraged last summer when gasoline prices reached $5/gallon, without any understanding or interest in what governmental and environmental policies caused it to happen. Like most uninvolved Americans he railed against the oil companies for “Windfall profits,” without any understanding of supply and demand as a factor.
Like most uninvolved Americans he knows nothing about economics. He is angry at seeing jobs lost overseas, but doesn’t understand why wages can’t continue to go up, even in a down economy. He doesn’t understand why the cost of education continues to go up, and the quality of education continues to go down – but he supports the NEA and its efforts to squash school of choice and voucher programs – because he does not want to see public money go to private schools. His parents had to make a sacrifice to send him to private school and he feels that others should have to do the same.
And finally, it is the uninvolved citizen who now finds himself upside down in his mortgage, surrounded by other homes that have either been abandoned to the bank or have been up for sale for months.
It is the uninvolved citizen who now sees auto companies filing for bankruptcy, and probably sees for the first time in his life, the very real prospect that he might soon be out of a job – with no prospect on the horizon of a recovery. It is the uninvolved citizen who looks at massive government spending giving away billions to banks that will not extend him credit to buy a car that he is no longer sure he can afford.
And it is the uninvolved citizen who, despite the best effort of the Oldstream Media, heard about a Tea Party in his area from a co-worker, and is beginning to question – again for the first time – the direction that this country is headed.
These are the people that we need to reach – that we need to recruit – in order to take back this country from the Social-Democrats who are currently running it. As Bill Ayers once famously said, “La educacion es revolucion!
It is time to educate the uninvolved and turn them into Conservatives.