Surely no rational and honest person doubts corruption exists in governments around the world, especially such governments as Afghanistan. Well, I mean, since the United States "news" media and members of the United States government pretty generally proclaim it as fact, it must be true.
It's obvious why those members of the U.S. government would not want to talk about it, but why are the members of the "news" media so reluctant to point out that the U.S. government is also corrupt?
One reason there is so much corruption is illustrated by the weekly column of the TFP publisher, Tom Griscom, on 6 December.
While bragging about the splendid "news" coverage of the ongoing party primary campaigns and the upcoming primary and general elections, he makes this statement:
"In less than a year, a Republican and a Democrat will face off."
Yes, that is true, but it is only partly true: There will be others seeking those various contested governmental offices.
Since, though, the "news" media bothers to mention only the vested interests of the two old parties, the people, the voters, the citizens, the taxpayers who must foot the bills the victorious politicians run up will, as usual, be cheated of the needed knowledge and information to make proper choices.
That is, since the "news" media make mention only of the two old parties, it will always be a member of the two old parties who takes office.
And that, gentle reader, is exactly why government in the United States, and perhaps especially in Tennessee, is just as corrupt as government in almost any other place in the world, except with less murder (so far).
The corrupt and dishonest "news" media, coupled with corrupt and incompetent government schools, work together to keep us as uninformed as possible; as a result, frequently only the worst even attempt to get elected; and that means the very worst are the usual winners.
Sunday, December 06, 2009
Clay Bennett must be a racist
Times editorial cartoonist Clay Bennett jumped on the demagogic bandwagon, joining the chorus crying "racist" for people who dared to disagree with the anointed one, Barack Obama.
Mr. Bennett even went so far as to call protesters Ku Kluxers in one especially nasty cartoon.
The "logic," or whatever lefties of his ilk use in lieu of, is that anyone who disagrees with the African-American president can't have any other basis for disagreement, so, QED, must be racist.
Well, on Sunday, 6 December, his cartoon attacks the almost equally black golfer, Tiger Woods, showing a golf cart with mud flaps sometimes found on over-the-road trailers depicting the exaggerated form of a female.
What else can we think of Mr. Bennett except he must be a racist, and probably a covert member of the KKK?
Mr. Bennett even went so far as to call protesters Ku Kluxers in one especially nasty cartoon.
The "logic," or whatever lefties of his ilk use in lieu of, is that anyone who disagrees with the African-American president can't have any other basis for disagreement, so, QED, must be racist.
Well, on Sunday, 6 December, his cartoon attacks the almost equally black golfer, Tiger Woods, showing a golf cart with mud flaps sometimes found on over-the-road trailers depicting the exaggerated form of a female.
What else can we think of Mr. Bennett except he must be a racist, and probably a covert member of the KKK?
TFP cheats readers, and others, again
With circulation dwindling (gee, I wonder why) and, thus, income and profits, publishers of "news" papers cut every corner and finagle every way they can.
One way the TFP publishers have found is to compress the funnies and slap some advertising onto the "extra" space.
Never mind that making them smaller makes them harder to read, and never mind that certain cartoonists, such as "Doonesbury" artist Garry Trudeau, even have contracts mandating a certain size, half of the front page of the Sunday funnies of 6 December is devoted to an ad for a satellite TV service (with a bargain rate of $19.99 for "over 120 channels") and the entire back page is an ad for a heater.
Never mind, too, that, as often stated here, the funnies are not only the best feature on this or any paper, often they are the only readable part, especially in this paper.
The number of strips has been cut over the years, with budget constraints and retirements ("Fox Trot" and "For Better Or Worse," for example), but this compression is really an insult.
One way the TFP publishers have found is to compress the funnies and slap some advertising onto the "extra" space.
Never mind that making them smaller makes them harder to read, and never mind that certain cartoonists, such as "Doonesbury" artist Garry Trudeau, even have contracts mandating a certain size, half of the front page of the Sunday funnies of 6 December is devoted to an ad for a satellite TV service (with a bargain rate of $19.99 for "over 120 channels") and the entire back page is an ad for a heater.
Never mind, too, that, as often stated here, the funnies are not only the best feature on this or any paper, often they are the only readable part, especially in this paper.
The number of strips has been cut over the years, with budget constraints and retirements ("Fox Trot" and "For Better Or Worse," for example), but this compression is really an insult.
Friday, December 04, 2009
Amazing: Paper does something right -- twice
As mentioned previously, John Trever is one of the most brilliant editorial cartoonists in the world -- in fact, in the history of the world.
His home base is the Albuquerque Journal, otherwise not a very distinguished paper, but located in one of the greatest places to live in the United States.
In the two-dimensional "thinking" that suffocates U.S. political discussion, Mr. Trever is usually thought of as "conservative."
In truth, he is much more intelligent than that.
As a political thinker, he is advanced far above the herd, and as an artist, he wields a pen in such manner to prove he is genuinely worthy of the term "artist."
Well, lately his work has been showing up in the TFP more often, not, unfortunately, replacing the loathsome Clay Bennett, but supplementing Bennett's work, and enlivening the otherwise deadly-dull Times editorial page -- AND appearing as the chief cartoon on the Free Press page.
Wait. What? Trever cartoons on both pages?
Yes! And, joy to behold, on Friday, 4 December, his work is on both pages -- both pages the same day!
Mark your calendar, and paint the date red. When TWO Trever cartoons get published the same day, it's almost worth buying the thing.
One site to look at: http://www.cagle.com/politicalcartoons/PCcartoons/trever.asp
For the Albuquerque Journal: http://www.abqjournal.com/
His home base is the Albuquerque Journal, otherwise not a very distinguished paper, but located in one of the greatest places to live in the United States.
In the two-dimensional "thinking" that suffocates U.S. political discussion, Mr. Trever is usually thought of as "conservative."
In truth, he is much more intelligent than that.
As a political thinker, he is advanced far above the herd, and as an artist, he wields a pen in such manner to prove he is genuinely worthy of the term "artist."
Well, lately his work has been showing up in the TFP more often, not, unfortunately, replacing the loathsome Clay Bennett, but supplementing Bennett's work, and enlivening the otherwise deadly-dull Times editorial page -- AND appearing as the chief cartoon on the Free Press page.
Wait. What? Trever cartoons on both pages?
Yes! And, joy to behold, on Friday, 4 December, his work is on both pages -- both pages the same day!
Mark your calendar, and paint the date red. When TWO Trever cartoons get published the same day, it's almost worth buying the thing.
One site to look at: http://www.cagle.com/politicalcartoons/PCcartoons/trever.asp
For the Albuquerque Journal: http://www.abqjournal.com/
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Times: More obscenely stupid daily
As mentioned, a time or two, the Times Free Press has two editorial pages. On the right, in two senses, are the more-or-less conservative views with editorials written by Lee Anderson; on the left, the editorials are apparently written, at least mostly, by Harry Austin.
As is true of newspaper editorials in my experience, the writing is usually stultifying and not intelligent.
The left side also has the work of one Clay Bennett, a vicious, unintelligent and/or dishonest cartoonist.
Sunday, he drew a bookstore with a section labeled "Self Help" and another labeled "Self Serving," stocked solely with Sarah Palin's new book.
Of course Bennett hasn't read the book; perhaps he doesn't know how to read; perhaps it's just that his mind (using the term loosely) is made up and he refuses to be confused with any facts.
Still, it's odd to see "self serving" as his pejorative of the day, this man who signs his name in fairly large letters on each cartoon.
Wednesday, still without reading the book, he makes another dig, this time with a character saying, "I heard she had a ghost whiner."
One must wonder what motivates such ugliness: Fear?
I've never heard of Sarah Palin threatening to throw, say, cartoonists into jail or fining them or even taxing them.
Then why so much fear, and of course not just from such lightweights as the loathsome Bennett. Time, formerly known as a "news" magazine, did its best to trivialize her, and the moron Joy Behar managed to make several untruthful statements in the one paragraph I heard her speak before I clicked on the channel changer.
Would I vote for Sarah Palin? Of course not. She's a Republican. But I would really like to see some sense of decency and proportionality. Even just a little.
SO WHAT IS A BETTER WORD?
In a private e-mail, a Tennessee legislator referred to President Obama as "a socialist," obviously a term seldom heard, and one that must cause trembling in such places as the editorial page office of such rags as the Times Free Press.
Mr. Austin, or whichever robot wrote the Wednesday editorial, says this: "The right-wing myth that President Obama is a socialist ..."
Perhaps Mr. Austin doesn't own a dictionary. Certainly there is much evidence no such book resides anywhere near the news and editorial rooms.
But surely any United States adult should know the word "socialist" means "an advocate of government ownership of the means of production."
How is Mr. Obama not a socialist?
My guess is the socialists, such as likely Mr. Austin, just don't want to admit to ownership of the word, don't want us to realize they are indeed socialists, and sometimes national socialists.
In an otherwise mediocre -- at best -- "news" paper, it also seems the socialists inform the rest of the paper, too.
FRONT PAGE HORROR
"Poll: Americans say rich should pay for reforms"
An Associated Press story indicates the complete failure of U.S. schools and the overwhelming success of the "news" media and academia in gulling the public.
Even though facts show otherwise, 72 percent who responded to this poll said they believe "insurance companies made too much profit."
Greed and envy are now apparently the chief motivating factors of not just the Democrat Party but an increasingly large percent of the public ... at least the ones the AP queried.
As is true of newspaper editorials in my experience, the writing is usually stultifying and not intelligent.
The left side also has the work of one Clay Bennett, a vicious, unintelligent and/or dishonest cartoonist.
Sunday, he drew a bookstore with a section labeled "Self Help" and another labeled "Self Serving," stocked solely with Sarah Palin's new book.
Of course Bennett hasn't read the book; perhaps he doesn't know how to read; perhaps it's just that his mind (using the term loosely) is made up and he refuses to be confused with any facts.
Still, it's odd to see "self serving" as his pejorative of the day, this man who signs his name in fairly large letters on each cartoon.
Wednesday, still without reading the book, he makes another dig, this time with a character saying, "I heard she had a ghost whiner."
One must wonder what motivates such ugliness: Fear?
I've never heard of Sarah Palin threatening to throw, say, cartoonists into jail or fining them or even taxing them.
Then why so much fear, and of course not just from such lightweights as the loathsome Bennett. Time, formerly known as a "news" magazine, did its best to trivialize her, and the moron Joy Behar managed to make several untruthful statements in the one paragraph I heard her speak before I clicked on the channel changer.
Would I vote for Sarah Palin? Of course not. She's a Republican. But I would really like to see some sense of decency and proportionality. Even just a little.
SO WHAT IS A BETTER WORD?
In a private e-mail, a Tennessee legislator referred to President Obama as "a socialist," obviously a term seldom heard, and one that must cause trembling in such places as the editorial page office of such rags as the Times Free Press.
Mr. Austin, or whichever robot wrote the Wednesday editorial, says this: "The right-wing myth that President Obama is a socialist ..."
Perhaps Mr. Austin doesn't own a dictionary. Certainly there is much evidence no such book resides anywhere near the news and editorial rooms.
But surely any United States adult should know the word "socialist" means "an advocate of government ownership of the means of production."
How is Mr. Obama not a socialist?
My guess is the socialists, such as likely Mr. Austin, just don't want to admit to ownership of the word, don't want us to realize they are indeed socialists, and sometimes national socialists.
In an otherwise mediocre -- at best -- "news" paper, it also seems the socialists inform the rest of the paper, too.
FRONT PAGE HORROR
"Poll: Americans say rich should pay for reforms"
An Associated Press story indicates the complete failure of U.S. schools and the overwhelming success of the "news" media and academia in gulling the public.
Even though facts show otherwise, 72 percent who responded to this poll said they believe "insurance companies made too much profit."
Greed and envy are now apparently the chief motivating factors of not just the Democrat Party but an increasingly large percent of the public ... at least the ones the AP queried.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Blind faith or superstition?
While religion, even the majority's Christian religion, gets a battering from the so-called "news" media, members of the media themselves continue to be overcome by superstition and blind faith.
This is a headline on Page 1 of the Tuesday, 3 November, edition: "Stimulus helps save jobs in Georgia, Tennessee."
The sole source of the "facts" in the story? A government Web site, recovery.gov.
Gosh, the lapdog press is so credulous.
This is a headline on Page 1 of the Tuesday, 3 November, edition: "Stimulus helps save jobs in Georgia, Tennessee."
The sole source of the "facts" in the story? A government Web site, recovery.gov.
Gosh, the lapdog press is so credulous.
Has subject addled "editors'" brains?
Cable television and Internet connection are being offered by the Electric Power Board, and most people have been looking forward to having competition to the corrupt and incompetent Comcast.
However, just recently it was discovered that EPB will be offering, among its cable choices, (gasp!) so-called "adult" TV, including the Playboy channel.
Naturally, since this is Chattanooga, ire has been raised. (Why do people forget they don't HAVE to watch television, and certainly don't HAVE to subscribe to any cable service?)
In a story Monday, 2 November, further proof is offered that perhaps "stimulus" money should be used to hire at least one capable copy editor for the TFP.
"Critics object to a government-owned utility putting out what they say is pornography. But EPB says it has a free speech mandate not to censure a diverse programming menu ..."
Obviously the word should be "censor."
"David Fowler, a former Republican state senator who now heads the Family Action Council of Tennessee, contends there is no excuse for a government identity peddling porn."
Obviously that should be "government entity."
And it is also obvious there ought to be more opposition to a government's getting into the entertainment business, but the Comcast monopoly has done such a lousy, and expensive, job of delivering cable TV that even many free enterprises have put their principles into escrow for the nonce.
However, just recently it was discovered that EPB will be offering, among its cable choices, (gasp!) so-called "adult" TV, including the Playboy channel.
Naturally, since this is Chattanooga, ire has been raised. (Why do people forget they don't HAVE to watch television, and certainly don't HAVE to subscribe to any cable service?)
In a story Monday, 2 November, further proof is offered that perhaps "stimulus" money should be used to hire at least one capable copy editor for the TFP.
"Critics object to a government-owned utility putting out what they say is pornography. But EPB says it has a free speech mandate not to censure a diverse programming menu ..."
Obviously the word should be "censor."
"David Fowler, a former Republican state senator who now heads the Family Action Council of Tennessee, contends there is no excuse for a government identity peddling porn."
Obviously that should be "government entity."
And it is also obvious there ought to be more opposition to a government's getting into the entertainment business, but the Comcast monopoly has done such a lousy, and expensive, job of delivering cable TV that even many free enterprises have put their principles into escrow for the nonce.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Consistency, thy name ain't Lee Anderson
As noted here previously, the Times Free Press has a perhaps unique policy of two editorial pages and two editorial policies ... sort of.
The Times has a left-wing fascist approach; the Free Press has a right-wing fascist approach.
Lee Anderson, long-time editorial writer for the right-hand pages, claims to be a strong supporter of the Constitution.
He is pretty consistently against further federal taxes (though he pretty consistently supports additional local taxes) and further federal encroachment ... unless his personal moral code calls for further federal encroachment.
For example, in an editorial on Sunday, 25 October, titled, "Wrong policy on marijuana," he takes to task the Obama administration for what seems to be its very first correct stand on legal matters.
Obama's attorney general Holder has decreed the feds will no longer violate the Constitution by harassing users of medical marijuana, at least in those states that have voted to legalize that particular herb.
Mr. Anderson's last paragraph reads, "Government cannot stop all illegal drug use, but its actions ought not to send the destructive, false message that drug abuse is OK."
Nowhere have I seen that Mr. Holder, or even Pres. Obama, endorses abusing marijuana -- they are too busy abusing taxpayers and citizens and Fox News.
But Mr. Anderson, handicapped by his superstitious Southern Christian background, fails miserably in being consistent, in being logical, in being rational.
To say "We won't throw you in jail because you have a different lifestyle or moral code from ours" is not the same as saying "Yeah, man, let's go wild and smoke that pot."
Forgetting for the moment that marijuana is less harmful than either tobacco or alcohol -- and obviously Mr. Anderson (who was probably there) has forgotten that alcohol once was itself illegal -- let's just carefully read the Constitution ... and we find there is not one word that allows the feds any authority to tell people they can't use marijuana, and especially is there not a word or syllable allowing the feds to override state laws on the subject.
Perhaps a foolish consistency is to be avoided, but it would be nice to find an intelligent consistency.
The Times has a left-wing fascist approach; the Free Press has a right-wing fascist approach.
Lee Anderson, long-time editorial writer for the right-hand pages, claims to be a strong supporter of the Constitution.
He is pretty consistently against further federal taxes (though he pretty consistently supports additional local taxes) and further federal encroachment ... unless his personal moral code calls for further federal encroachment.
For example, in an editorial on Sunday, 25 October, titled, "Wrong policy on marijuana," he takes to task the Obama administration for what seems to be its very first correct stand on legal matters.
Obama's attorney general Holder has decreed the feds will no longer violate the Constitution by harassing users of medical marijuana, at least in those states that have voted to legalize that particular herb.
Mr. Anderson's last paragraph reads, "Government cannot stop all illegal drug use, but its actions ought not to send the destructive, false message that drug abuse is OK."
Nowhere have I seen that Mr. Holder, or even Pres. Obama, endorses abusing marijuana -- they are too busy abusing taxpayers and citizens and Fox News.
But Mr. Anderson, handicapped by his superstitious Southern Christian background, fails miserably in being consistent, in being logical, in being rational.
To say "We won't throw you in jail because you have a different lifestyle or moral code from ours" is not the same as saying "Yeah, man, let's go wild and smoke that pot."
Forgetting for the moment that marijuana is less harmful than either tobacco or alcohol -- and obviously Mr. Anderson (who was probably there) has forgotten that alcohol once was itself illegal -- let's just carefully read the Constitution ... and we find there is not one word that allows the feds any authority to tell people they can't use marijuana, and especially is there not a word or syllable allowing the feds to override state laws on the subject.
Perhaps a foolish consistency is to be avoided, but it would be nice to find an intelligent consistency.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Doonesbury joins fray
Garry Trudeau, originator and probably still sometime writer of the "Doonesbury" cartoon strip, has jumped in to the fray with both feet in his mouth.
His strip of Sunday, 27 September, makes the claim that Hitler was the greatest evil in history.
As Al Smith might have said, let's look at the record: Most people believe Hitler killed six million people.
Actually, six million is the generally accepted figure for the number of Jews murdered.
There were at least twice that, counting other religious or ethnic victims.
Yet Stalin and Khrushchev murdered more than that just in (what was then known as the) Ukraine. I believe it was Harrison Salisbury who said the total number of Stalin victims was about 85 million.
Mao and the Chinese Communists murdered between 50 and 100 million!
Why, why, why do the American leftists seem never to admit there is evil on the left?
His strip of Sunday, 27 September, makes the claim that Hitler was the greatest evil in history.
As Al Smith might have said, let's look at the record: Most people believe Hitler killed six million people.
Actually, six million is the generally accepted figure for the number of Jews murdered.
There were at least twice that, counting other religious or ethnic victims.
Yet Stalin and Khrushchev murdered more than that just in (what was then known as the) Ukraine. I believe it was Harrison Salisbury who said the total number of Stalin victims was about 85 million.
Mao and the Chinese Communists murdered between 50 and 100 million!
Why, why, why do the American leftists seem never to admit there is evil on the left?
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Terry Stulce still not sane
One-time would-be candidate for Congress Terry Stulce has popped back out of the woodwork to write a letter to the editor, 23 September.
He would have been better served keeping a lower profile.
Once again, Mr. Stulce, of whom I used to think favorably, acts as the sock puppet to his ventriloquist masters in the Demagogic Party.
He has a letter referring to "the stench of racism," a nonsensical charge even the alleged victim of any racism has pooh-poohed. (As I have said elsewhere, President Obama is standing head and shoulders above his supporters, and not taken that very low road marched down by his boot-lickers and sycophants, especially those in the "news" media.)
Face it: The Demagogues have not a leg of logic, not a toe, to stand on and they must smear their opponents with their handiest brush. (Even Republicans are starting to look better by comparison.)
As I have said elsewhere, and will say again, Samuel Johnson's "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" is way out of date. Today, the last refuge of a scoundrel is "You are a racist."
He would have been better served keeping a lower profile.
Once again, Mr. Stulce, of whom I used to think favorably, acts as the sock puppet to his ventriloquist masters in the Demagogic Party.
He has a letter referring to "the stench of racism," a nonsensical charge even the alleged victim of any racism has pooh-poohed. (As I have said elsewhere, President Obama is standing head and shoulders above his supporters, and not taken that very low road marched down by his boot-lickers and sycophants, especially those in the "news" media.)
Face it: The Demagogues have not a leg of logic, not a toe, to stand on and they must smear their opponents with their handiest brush. (Even Republicans are starting to look better by comparison.)
As I have said elsewhere, and will say again, Samuel Johnson's "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" is way out of date. Today, the last refuge of a scoundrel is "You are a racist."
Friday, September 18, 2009
Foul-minded cartoonist further oversteps
Nasty and unintelligent, or perhaps dishonest, cartoonist Clay Bennett has joined the caterwauling chorus of leftist lunacy proclaiming the protests are "racist."
He really overstepped any bounds of decency with a cartoon (and he does draw well) of a protest crowd gathered around a burning cross.
Bennett is either a -- and I hate this word and its too-frequent use -- liar, knowing what he draws is untrue, or he is really super-stupid and he actually believes that nonsense, despite the proof to the contrary.
Take a look at this YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LejNkRd-3w
I'll bet Bennett won't even look.
Here's another site: http://www.project21.org/P21Index.html
He really overstepped any bounds of decency with a cartoon (and he does draw well) of a protest crowd gathered around a burning cross.
Bennett is either a -- and I hate this word and its too-frequent use -- liar, knowing what he draws is untrue, or he is really super-stupid and he actually believes that nonsense, despite the proof to the contrary.
Take a look at this YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LejNkRd-3w
I'll bet Bennett won't even look.
Here's another site: http://www.project21.org/P21Index.html
Response to e-mail
Reporter Emily Bregel has answered my e-mail, very cordially, too. (See "Tempest" post below.)
She does, though, persist in her belief her reporting was not partisan and she persists in her belief that her use of "debunked" was both not partisan and accurate.
I have replied to her nice note and hope she will continue our correspondence.
If she gives her permission, I will pass on what she said.
Cautionary note: Despite her courtesy, her cordiality, her attitude and her knowledge, or lack thereof, and that of other members of the "news" media, continue to hold our nation in peril.
Their firm belief that they know best, when in fact they don't know much at all, will likely be the downfall of our republic.
She does, though, persist in her belief her reporting was not partisan and she persists in her belief that her use of "debunked" was both not partisan and accurate.
I have replied to her nice note and hope she will continue our correspondence.
If she gives her permission, I will pass on what she said.
Cautionary note: Despite her courtesy, her cordiality, her attitude and her knowledge, or lack thereof, and that of other members of the "news" media, continue to hold our nation in peril.
Their firm belief that they know best, when in fact they don't know much at all, will likely be the downfall of our republic.
Friday, September 04, 2009
Argument by intimidation
Lacking any relevant evidence to the contrary, Times editors recently responded to an intelligent question with what must be considered, among other things, a foolish non sequitur.
An intelligent, but naive, letter to the editor took the Times robots to task for continuing to publish the columns of Paul Krugman: "How many letters do you need to get before you realize this guy is not an economist, but a left-wing extremist."
The crushing rejoinder from the Times editorial page editor: "Editor's note: Princeton economist Paul Krugman was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics last year."
Wow, there is certainly no comeback for that.
Q.E.D. Proof positive that every thought of Mr. Krugman is gold.
Yessir, there, right in front of us, is just further evidence of why newspapers are fast going the way of the dodo.
Oh, the letter-writer's naivete is that he seems to believe the Times would cease publishing something just because it is wrong and full of garbage. Hah!
That's the raison-d'etre for the Times.
An intelligent, but naive, letter to the editor took the Times robots to task for continuing to publish the columns of Paul Krugman: "How many letters do you need to get before you realize this guy is not an economist, but a left-wing extremist."
The crushing rejoinder from the Times editorial page editor: "Editor's note: Princeton economist Paul Krugman was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics last year."
Wow, there is certainly no comeback for that.
Q.E.D. Proof positive that every thought of Mr. Krugman is gold.
Yessir, there, right in front of us, is just further evidence of why newspapers are fast going the way of the dodo.
Oh, the letter-writer's naivete is that he seems to believe the Times would cease publishing something just because it is wrong and full of garbage. Hah!
That's the raison-d'etre for the Times.
Who's "mean-spirited"?
Not too many years ago, one of the pet smear words of the left was "mean-spirited," meaning, essentially, anyone, especially Republicans, who didn't go along with the latest trendy collectivist notion, and, worse, even dared to take a public stand in opposition.
Well, today "mean-spirited" is so very apt for the media left generally and, especially, for Clay Bennett, the nasty and not very intelligent cartoonist for the Times.
On Wednesday, 3 September, his pithy observation is a simple pair of snakes slithering around, one saying to the other, "Yeah, Dick Cheney makes my skin crawl, too."
This kind of mean-spirited hate doesn't really do much for civil discourse, doesn't add a thing to any kind of public discussion.
I wonder, often, how people like Bennett can sleep at night, and I'm sure he must have a beard because how could he look at himself each morning to shave?
Well, today "mean-spirited" is so very apt for the media left generally and, especially, for Clay Bennett, the nasty and not very intelligent cartoonist for the Times.
On Wednesday, 3 September, his pithy observation is a simple pair of snakes slithering around, one saying to the other, "Yeah, Dick Cheney makes my skin crawl, too."
This kind of mean-spirited hate doesn't really do much for civil discourse, doesn't add a thing to any kind of public discussion.
I wonder, often, how people like Bennett can sleep at night, and I'm sure he must have a beard because how could he look at himself each morning to shave?
Monday, August 31, 2009
"Tempest at town halls"
In the Sunday, 30 August, edition, that was the headline on a typical story. I wrote the reporter whose name was on it:
31 August 2009
Ms. Emily Bregel
ebregel@timesfreepress.com
Dear Ms. Bregel,
You did a pretty good job in your Sunday article on the “tempest” around the so-called health care reform proposals, but you stepped away from reporting into advocacy in one paragraph in particular.
You said, or perhaps an editor made you say, “… referring to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s widely debunked assertion that the Obama administration’s reform proposal would lead to government panels deciding to withhold health care for those deemed ‘unproductive.’”
There are several things wrong in that one partial sentence.
First, Sarah Palin is not the only person to make such a claim. Writings by Pres. Obama’s own medical adviser discusses, even advocates, exactly such a panel. If you need documentation, please let me know and I’ll send it.
In those countries and even states where some government or other controls health care, individual bureaucrats or groups of them are making such decisions even as we sit here.
Of course no one involved would call it a “death panel” and would, in fact, flinch from any such appellation, or even hint of such intentions. And possibly it really is an extreme statement of what is proposed … but it is not completely wrong.
Second, the assertion has indeed been widely opposed and even denounced but not disproved. If you want to talk about ideas that have been “widely debunked,” I offer you the notion of human-caused global warming. Thousands of scientists and philosophers have “debunked” the idea, but the notion still holds sway among politicians and journalists and indeed some other scientists, especially those dependent on government grants.
The terminology itself is not honest journalism. Merriam-Webster defines it thus: “to expose the sham or falseness of.” You, or an editor, take sides with such phraseology.
I spent too many years as a journalist myself to allow such partisanship to go unchallenged.
Finally, let me share with you this story of a government-run health-care system:
Disease vector — Though swine flu has yet to do much harm in the United States, it is not only Mexico and parts south that are suffering. The virus has spread quickly among the tribal villages of far northern Manitoba, accounting for one-quarter of that province’s sick. The urgency of the situation is compounded by many of the affected communities lacking a source of running water, making impossible the hygienic procedures necessary for containing the flu.
As one might imagine, getting vaccines to such remote locations is a daunting logistical challenge, and a demonstration of how poorly suited bureaucratic structures are for tasks such as delivering emergency aid. One might think, though, that the many layers of government devoted to ensuring Canadian health care could at least coordinate an airdrop of a case of hand sanitizer. But healthcare paternalism is way too advanced up north to roll back now; the Toronto Star (June 25) reports that “Health Canada had delayed sending alcohol-based hand sanitizers to some First Nations communities for fear some residents might drink it.”
So here we have a simple and cheap method for dealing with the virus among one of the poorest groups of people in the country, kept at bay by the fear that this method will speed the demise of chronic alcoholics whose lives already have less expectancy than those infected with the flu. The utter predictability of it all is telling; yet another giveaway that healthcare boards have far less interest in the public weal than in the perpetuation of their own power. — Andrew Ferguson
You will please note that this is not an attack on you, nor really an attack on what you wrote, or at least what had your byline.
It is, though, a plea that you try to avoid partisanship in the future, or try to urge your editor to avoid it.
If you have any questions on the subject or any aspects thereof, I will be more than happy to help you find the answers.
Thanking you for your time and attention, I am
Yours sincerely and respectfully,
Michael Morrison
31 August 2009
Ms. Emily Bregel
ebregel@timesfreepress.com
Dear Ms. Bregel,
You did a pretty good job in your Sunday article on the “tempest” around the so-called health care reform proposals, but you stepped away from reporting into advocacy in one paragraph in particular.
You said, or perhaps an editor made you say, “… referring to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s widely debunked assertion that the Obama administration’s reform proposal would lead to government panels deciding to withhold health care for those deemed ‘unproductive.’”
There are several things wrong in that one partial sentence.
First, Sarah Palin is not the only person to make such a claim. Writings by Pres. Obama’s own medical adviser discusses, even advocates, exactly such a panel. If you need documentation, please let me know and I’ll send it.
In those countries and even states where some government or other controls health care, individual bureaucrats or groups of them are making such decisions even as we sit here.
Of course no one involved would call it a “death panel” and would, in fact, flinch from any such appellation, or even hint of such intentions. And possibly it really is an extreme statement of what is proposed … but it is not completely wrong.
Second, the assertion has indeed been widely opposed and even denounced but not disproved. If you want to talk about ideas that have been “widely debunked,” I offer you the notion of human-caused global warming. Thousands of scientists and philosophers have “debunked” the idea, but the notion still holds sway among politicians and journalists and indeed some other scientists, especially those dependent on government grants.
The terminology itself is not honest journalism. Merriam-Webster defines it thus: “to expose the sham or falseness of.” You, or an editor, take sides with such phraseology.
I spent too many years as a journalist myself to allow such partisanship to go unchallenged.
Finally, let me share with you this story of a government-run health-care system:
Disease vector — Though swine flu has yet to do much harm in the United States, it is not only Mexico and parts south that are suffering. The virus has spread quickly among the tribal villages of far northern Manitoba, accounting for one-quarter of that province’s sick. The urgency of the situation is compounded by many of the affected communities lacking a source of running water, making impossible the hygienic procedures necessary for containing the flu.
As one might imagine, getting vaccines to such remote locations is a daunting logistical challenge, and a demonstration of how poorly suited bureaucratic structures are for tasks such as delivering emergency aid. One might think, though, that the many layers of government devoted to ensuring Canadian health care could at least coordinate an airdrop of a case of hand sanitizer. But healthcare paternalism is way too advanced up north to roll back now; the Toronto Star (June 25) reports that “Health Canada had delayed sending alcohol-based hand sanitizers to some First Nations communities for fear some residents might drink it.”
So here we have a simple and cheap method for dealing with the virus among one of the poorest groups of people in the country, kept at bay by the fear that this method will speed the demise of chronic alcoholics whose lives already have less expectancy than those infected with the flu. The utter predictability of it all is telling; yet another giveaway that healthcare boards have far less interest in the public weal than in the perpetuation of their own power. — Andrew Ferguson
You will please note that this is not an attack on you, nor really an attack on what you wrote, or at least what had your byline.
It is, though, a plea that you try to avoid partisanship in the future, or try to urge your editor to avoid it.
If you have any questions on the subject or any aspects thereof, I will be more than happy to help you find the answers.
Thanking you for your time and attention, I am
Yours sincerely and respectfully,
Michael Morrison
Monday, August 10, 2009
Paper publishes, encourages hate, dishonesty
Times cartoonist Clay Bennett is either dishonest or unintelligent ... or, to be fair, I guess he could be both.
Obviously he wouldn't have been hired for his position if he weren't a flaming leftie, but even for this excuse of a paper and even for this astonishingly stupid editorial page, Bennett is something of an extremist.
His Sunday, 9 August, cartoon, straight out of the talking points directive from the Democrat National Committee, shows the back of some speaker at a town hall meeting looking at an audience where all the signs say, for example, "Obamacare equals communism" and "Health care reform promotes euthanasia."
The caption reads, "Unfortunately, the town hall meeting was taken over by the village idiots."
One of the major problems with such leftists as Bennett is the unwillingness to grant either intelligence or knowledge or sincerity to their opponents; one of the other problems with such leftists as Bennett is their eagerness to set up straw men, who are, of course, much easier to knock down than the real opponents.
And it is much easier to knock down straw men than to deal with the issues, such as the obscene costs such government intrusion will have, or the total lack of any constitutional authority, or, most of all, the total immorality of such intrusion.
When such hatemongers as Clay Bennett are given access to such a podium, is it any wonder those who oppose further federal interference get angry?
Is such distortion by such hatemongers as Bennett going to help or just further such anger?
Obviously he wouldn't have been hired for his position if he weren't a flaming leftie, but even for this excuse of a paper and even for this astonishingly stupid editorial page, Bennett is something of an extremist.
His Sunday, 9 August, cartoon, straight out of the talking points directive from the Democrat National Committee, shows the back of some speaker at a town hall meeting looking at an audience where all the signs say, for example, "Obamacare equals communism" and "Health care reform promotes euthanasia."
The caption reads, "Unfortunately, the town hall meeting was taken over by the village idiots."
One of the major problems with such leftists as Bennett is the unwillingness to grant either intelligence or knowledge or sincerity to their opponents; one of the other problems with such leftists as Bennett is their eagerness to set up straw men, who are, of course, much easier to knock down than the real opponents.
And it is much easier to knock down straw men than to deal with the issues, such as the obscene costs such government intrusion will have, or the total lack of any constitutional authority, or, most of all, the total immorality of such intrusion.
When such hatemongers as Clay Bennett are given access to such a podium, is it any wonder those who oppose further federal interference get angry?
Is such distortion by such hatemongers as Bennett going to help or just further such anger?
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Not news: TFP run by incompetent morons
This is a letter to the editor, Sunday, 4 July:
Have we acquired another tyranny?
We are celebrating the independence of our country from England. How wonderful that there were such giants at that particular time. The courage, dedication, selflessness, and wisdom that it took to form our government were phenomenal.
Have we swapped one tyranny for another? It appears so. Without teaching history, how can our young know the true meaning of courage, sacrifice and independence? The government does not make jobs and create income. It doles out transfer payments from producers -- it just seems to come from the government.
To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, we cannot raise up one person by tearing down another. We are saddling our economy and our future with a debt from which we may not recover. We're penalizing our producers to benefit non-producers. We are hobbling our industry with costs and restrictions that our competitor countries are not dealing with. We're raising taxes and costs on people with the economy in recession. We have politicians trying to run bands, corporations and the government who've never even run a candy store.
Let's hope and pray the nation will come to its collective senses. I fear that it will not.
Save energy, paper and money -- get the Green Toolbar.
Don Moon
The incompetents at the TFP obviously don't even read their copy before sending it off to the presses.
And that's one more reason normal people don't read the raggedy paper.
I am trying to contact Mr. Moon to learn his reaction to the morons' adding that advertising line to his letter.
My guess is incredulity.
Have we acquired another tyranny?
We are celebrating the independence of our country from England. How wonderful that there were such giants at that particular time. The courage, dedication, selflessness, and wisdom that it took to form our government were phenomenal.
Have we swapped one tyranny for another? It appears so. Without teaching history, how can our young know the true meaning of courage, sacrifice and independence? The government does not make jobs and create income. It doles out transfer payments from producers -- it just seems to come from the government.
To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, we cannot raise up one person by tearing down another. We are saddling our economy and our future with a debt from which we may not recover. We're penalizing our producers to benefit non-producers. We are hobbling our industry with costs and restrictions that our competitor countries are not dealing with. We're raising taxes and costs on people with the economy in recession. We have politicians trying to run bands, corporations and the government who've never even run a candy store.
Let's hope and pray the nation will come to its collective senses. I fear that it will not.
Save energy, paper and money -- get the Green Toolbar.
Don Moon
The incompetents at the TFP obviously don't even read their copy before sending it off to the presses.
And that's one more reason normal people don't read the raggedy paper.
I am trying to contact Mr. Moon to learn his reaction to the morons' adding that advertising line to his letter.
My guess is incredulity.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
13th Amendment ignored if not repealed
In few words, it says, "1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
(Note, by the way, the reference to "their" jurisdiction. The Constitution was still acknowledging that these United States compose a union of sovereign states.)
"Involuntary servitude," in other words, is thenceforth, illegal.
Yet this story appeared in the TFP Saturday, 23 May, on Page A1: "Arrests near for jury-duty dodgers."
"Two Hamilton County residents will be arrested for failing to show up for jury duty, officials confirmed Friday.
"The arrest warrants are the first to be issued since Tennessee's new, tougher jury rules went into effect at the beginning of the year."
So, someone who finds it abhorrent to put another human being into a cage will himself be put into a cage?
Or someone who has been out of town and didn't get his mail is now subject to being jailed?
Or, even more basic, a citizen, a human individual, can be forced into being on a panel that might put another human being into a cage?
And what are the reasons for that caging? Perhaps that human being ingested some substance that doesn't have official approval?
Still, let me re-stress that basic point: How can a country that claims to be free in actuality force allegedly free human beings into servitude -- by definition involuntary servitude?
Jury duty is something an awful lot of people actually fear.
Probably tens of thousands of people across the country never register to vote purely out of the fear of being called for jury duty.
Now, of course, the statists and collectivists use driver license lists as well as voter rolls, and sometimes other lists, to find victims for the conscription.
Finally, consider the ridiculous contradiction of forcing people to be jurists, based on the paradox that the jury system protects freedom.
Probably that part is true: Juries can provide a bulwark against tyranny, as witness some great trials in history when the jurors refused to accept the court's orders, even risking punishment themselves to stand for right.
(I recommend you check into the Fully Informed Jury Association.)
Juries are, and are so told in, for example, Georgia, arbiters of both the law and the facts in any individual case.
But in far too many states, juries are lied to and told they must rule according to a judge's instructions, and phooey on the immorality or irrationality of any law.
Try, though, to volunteer for jury service. Try it.
In most states, if not all, that is not allowed.
Jurors are selected only from a bunch of coerced people who mostly don't want to be there.
Someone defined a jury as twelve people who are too dumb to get out of jury duty.
Very cynical, perhaps, but it is also a truism that lawyers often want the dumbest people possible on a jury.
There must be a better system. Coercion is always wrong.
Maybe someone reading this will offer a more reasonable plan.
(Note, by the way, the reference to "their" jurisdiction. The Constitution was still acknowledging that these United States compose a union of sovereign states.)
"Involuntary servitude," in other words, is thenceforth, illegal.
Yet this story appeared in the TFP Saturday, 23 May, on Page A1: "Arrests near for jury-duty dodgers."
"Two Hamilton County residents will be arrested for failing to show up for jury duty, officials confirmed Friday.
"The arrest warrants are the first to be issued since Tennessee's new, tougher jury rules went into effect at the beginning of the year."
So, someone who finds it abhorrent to put another human being into a cage will himself be put into a cage?
Or someone who has been out of town and didn't get his mail is now subject to being jailed?
Or, even more basic, a citizen, a human individual, can be forced into being on a panel that might put another human being into a cage?
And what are the reasons for that caging? Perhaps that human being ingested some substance that doesn't have official approval?
Still, let me re-stress that basic point: How can a country that claims to be free in actuality force allegedly free human beings into servitude -- by definition involuntary servitude?
Jury duty is something an awful lot of people actually fear.
Probably tens of thousands of people across the country never register to vote purely out of the fear of being called for jury duty.
Now, of course, the statists and collectivists use driver license lists as well as voter rolls, and sometimes other lists, to find victims for the conscription.
Finally, consider the ridiculous contradiction of forcing people to be jurists, based on the paradox that the jury system protects freedom.
Probably that part is true: Juries can provide a bulwark against tyranny, as witness some great trials in history when the jurors refused to accept the court's orders, even risking punishment themselves to stand for right.
(I recommend you check into the Fully Informed Jury Association.)
Juries are, and are so told in, for example, Georgia, arbiters of both the law and the facts in any individual case.
But in far too many states, juries are lied to and told they must rule according to a judge's instructions, and phooey on the immorality or irrationality of any law.
Try, though, to volunteer for jury service. Try it.
In most states, if not all, that is not allowed.
Jurors are selected only from a bunch of coerced people who mostly don't want to be there.
Someone defined a jury as twelve people who are too dumb to get out of jury duty.
Very cynical, perhaps, but it is also a truism that lawyers often want the dumbest people possible on a jury.
There must be a better system. Coercion is always wrong.
Maybe someone reading this will offer a more reasonable plan.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Pot suspicious of kettle
"Morley Safer," reads the headline, "suspicious of the blogosphere."
In the TFP of Thursday, 21 May, in the section called "People in the News" which is usually reserved to stories about show biz folks, is the Associated Press story about the "CBS News veteran" saying "he trusts citizen journalism as much as he would trust citizen surgery."
Safer, 77, "said good journalism needs structure and responsibility."
Most rational and knowledgeable people agree that CBS has been responsible, responsible for some mighty dishonest and biased reporting for a mighty long time.
From my childhood, CBS was known as the "Communist Broadcasting System" for its far-left orientation.
The only thing worse than the CBS bias was the CBS sanctimony when people expressed their belief in its bias.
To this day, the "Rather-biased" Dan tries to insist he believed his obvious forgery about George W. Bush's National Guard service, and swears it's true ... despite all the evidence.
Are there ignorami, paranoiacs, wackos, liars, and propagandists among the blogosphere? Yep. Just as there are among the CBS "news" people.
Which is not to omit NBC and ABC from this charge. ABC, for example, used to carry signs to '60s demonstrations to be sure it would have plenty to take pictures of.
With the blogosphere, though, we have a lot more options and we can make comparisons of some different perspectives we never get from those networks.
In the TFP of Thursday, 21 May, in the section called "People in the News" which is usually reserved to stories about show biz folks, is the Associated Press story about the "CBS News veteran" saying "he trusts citizen journalism as much as he would trust citizen surgery."
Safer, 77, "said good journalism needs structure and responsibility."
Most rational and knowledgeable people agree that CBS has been responsible, responsible for some mighty dishonest and biased reporting for a mighty long time.
From my childhood, CBS was known as the "Communist Broadcasting System" for its far-left orientation.
The only thing worse than the CBS bias was the CBS sanctimony when people expressed their belief in its bias.
To this day, the "Rather-biased" Dan tries to insist he believed his obvious forgery about George W. Bush's National Guard service, and swears it's true ... despite all the evidence.
Are there ignorami, paranoiacs, wackos, liars, and propagandists among the blogosphere? Yep. Just as there are among the CBS "news" people.
Which is not to omit NBC and ABC from this charge. ABC, for example, used to carry signs to '60s demonstrations to be sure it would have plenty to take pictures of.
With the blogosphere, though, we have a lot more options and we can make comparisons of some different perspectives we never get from those networks.
13th Amendment Repealed?
"Truant's parent given jail time," reads a front-page headline Thursday, 21 May.
In a story by the unfortunately named Chloé Morrison (not that there's anything wrong with "Chloé"), we are told a juvenile court judge in Marion County sentenced "the mother of a Whitwell Elementary School second grader to 48 hours in jail for not getting her child to school."
Here is the astonishing news, leading to the headline on this post: "School leaders said they are forced to crack down on parents of truant students because federal law requires schools to have high attendance rates."
Knowing the very low quality of "school leaders" in this part of the world, I suppose it is quite possible they actually believe the hogwash quoted here.
In fact, though, there is not one word in the U.S. Constitution that allows any federal official or agency to "require schools to have high attendance rates."
However, perhaps the gimmick is the one so many of us tried to warn about, the unconstitutional law that says, Obey our orders or we will cut your funding.
"School leaders" across this once-great nation have foolishly, and perhaps criminally, been suckered by the promise of "free money," and continue to pant and beg for it even after they learn about some of the catches, including having to match or more than match that "free money" and, worst of all, unquestioned obedience to the "education czars," although it is far less about education than about schooling.
Ironically, the "No Child Left Behind" concept was accountability, but the actual result has been obedience to educrats, far less knowledge among the youthful victims, and a huge growth industry in layers of bureaucrats among school districts across the country.
Neither the 13th nor the 10th Amendments allow such federal intervention, but the cowardice of "school leaders" has over-ridden the law.
In a story by the unfortunately named Chloé Morrison (not that there's anything wrong with "Chloé"), we are told a juvenile court judge in Marion County sentenced "the mother of a Whitwell Elementary School second grader to 48 hours in jail for not getting her child to school."
Here is the astonishing news, leading to the headline on this post: "School leaders said they are forced to crack down on parents of truant students because federal law requires schools to have high attendance rates."
Knowing the very low quality of "school leaders" in this part of the world, I suppose it is quite possible they actually believe the hogwash quoted here.
In fact, though, there is not one word in the U.S. Constitution that allows any federal official or agency to "require schools to have high attendance rates."
However, perhaps the gimmick is the one so many of us tried to warn about, the unconstitutional law that says, Obey our orders or we will cut your funding.
"School leaders" across this once-great nation have foolishly, and perhaps criminally, been suckered by the promise of "free money," and continue to pant and beg for it even after they learn about some of the catches, including having to match or more than match that "free money" and, worst of all, unquestioned obedience to the "education czars," although it is far less about education than about schooling.
Ironically, the "No Child Left Behind" concept was accountability, but the actual result has been obedience to educrats, far less knowledge among the youthful victims, and a huge growth industry in layers of bureaucrats among school districts across the country.
Neither the 13th nor the 10th Amendments allow such federal intervention, but the cowardice of "school leaders" has over-ridden the law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
