I posted within minutes last year after Senator Kennedy was diagnosed with the brain tumor that claimed his life late Tuesday night. It has taken me a little longer this time, but I know my thoughts, along with those of all Americans, have been with the Kennedy family over the last couple of days, especially since they so recently experienced the loss of another family member, Eunice Shriver.
My parents were, to say the least, not political types at the time I was growing up. They still aren't, but they do vote now. Hard to say where I acquired my politically oriented genes. In any event, one of the less than 10 books of a pseudo-political nature that we had on our bookshelf growing up was a coffee table-type book on the JFK assassination. (Don't ask. I don't know.) A very youthful Teddy (31 years old at the time) was featured prominently in a number of the photos. Dad also subscribed to "US News and World Report", which I am pretty sure is still in circulation, but was one of 3 weekly magazines that were widely read even by non-news junkies back in those days when dinosaurs roamed the earth. One of the first pictures I remember seeing back when my political appetite was beginning to be whetted was a picture of Senator Ted Kennedy with the rest of his family at a candlelight memorial vigil for his other fallen brother, Robert F. Kennedy.
And from that point on, Senator Ted Kennedy loomed large on the political landscape, even though the issues on which I agreed with him were few and miniscule.
It is no exaggeration when Kennedy is referenced as the "Last Lion" of the Senate, much as I hate to admit it and wish a conservative could hold a similar title. Kennedy simply was a legislative and political giant, with a name that contained the historical resonance of a bygone era. One of the highlights of an early visit back in 2001 that Pam and I made to the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC was a brief glimpse of Ted Kennedy on the Senate floor. Funny the things you recall...I remember how florid his complexion was and that his back was a little hunched. The latter was probably due to a plane crash he survived back in the late '60's. As to the facial redness...I will kindly spare further comment.
Kennedy was a genuine liberal and made no bones about it. He never pretended to be other than what he was. For this, I respect his memory and wish for more politicians who would be willing to be correspondingly honest and forthright regarding their convictions.
It is sad, but I must do my 2 cents worth to help set the record straight about the mainstream media spin we have endured for the last 1 & 1/2 days on Ted Kennedy's record and outlook. It is understandable that Kennedy's acolytes in both politics and the media are trying to attach the sentimental appeal of his memory to a health care bill that will prove devastating to the nation if it is passed. After all, this was, by Kennedy's own admission, the cause to which he devoted his career.
It is inexcusable, however, when these same people, in reverential tones, counsel kindness and noncensoriousness to us all, while invoking Ted Kennedy's reputation. This is pure and simple falsehood, at best, and disingenuousness at worst.
As Bill Kristol accurately pointed out on "Special Report" last night, no conservative can ever forget the smear campaign that Kennedy led against the illustrious Judge Robert Bork, one of the most powerful legal minds of the 20th century. Here, courtesy of Townhall.com, is the famous clip that ended up destroying Bork's chances of occupying a seat on the Supreme Court, one of the greatest losses in the history of the American judiciary.
Enough has been said about Chappaquiddick and the story is well known. I will not revisit it further.
American politics will never be the same, and even though my sympathies are with the Kennedy family at this time of grief, I cannot pretend that I will miss the vigorously leftist activism of Senator Ted Kennedy. I do, however, desperately wish that we could produce a lion on our side who would fight for the Constitution and its tenets with the same enthusiasm and zest with which Senator Kennedy championed progressive causes.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Rest in peace, Robert Novak
I heard the news from Mark Steyn (who was filling in for Rush on Tuesday) that Robert Novak had passed away, succumbing to the brain tumor with which he was diagnosed last summer.
I never got to meet Bob Novak or even hear him speak, but I felt a profound sadness, nonetheless. I fear we will not see his kind again. Novak was an old-school reporter who was fearlessly committed to integrity. He was, however, not afraid to brandish his conservative credentials, though this did not translate to protectiveness towards Republican politicians.
Robert Novak was famous for the scoops that he uncovered, and there was a new one almost every week. I read his columns religiously. They were always interesting and he could write like nobody's business. Novak was more than your standard-issue pundit; there was clout behind what he wrote and said because of the half a century he had spent becoming acquainted with the ways of Washington.
I think I first saw Novak on Crossfire back around 2002 or so; he was representing the Right and Paul Begala the Left. Candidly, Novak was a far more gifted writer than he was a speaker; he was not as glib on his feet as some (Tucker Carlson, for instance, whom I also like and yes, Paul Begala, whom I don't so much), but he always had something worthwhile to say or cover.
One of the last memories I have is of Novak covering the South Carolina Republican primary for Fox News. McCain had just won and Novak essentially predicted that this indicated that the nomination now belonged to McCain. Sean Hannity, who was anchoring at that moment, protested that surely this didn't mean it was all over for Mitt Romney and the other hopefuls? Novak replied that he had covered Republicans for 50 years and if South Carolina GOP voters were throwing their support behind a candidate, his nomination was virtually assured. We all know how that turned out.
Novak's story of his journey to the Catholic faith from agnosticism is one of the most moving conversion stories I have ever encountered. He details this in his memoir, as well. He was approached in 1996 by a young female student who asked if he had joined the church (evidently, she knew that he had looked into it). He replied that he had not and had no intention of doing so anytime soon. Her response was, "Mr. Novak, life is short, but eternity is forever." He was so shaken by this simple witness that he began a spiritual journey that lasted until his death.
It is sad that Novak's final years were marked by the controversy of the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson non-story. Novak did nothing wrong in reporting the facts that he was given by the source he eventually disclosed: Undersecretary of State Richard Armitage. Yet, he was forced to expend $160,000 in legal fees while keeping silent as the situation unfolded. The whole thing was a sham and charade masquerading as justice, and it was fitting that Novak was ultimately cleared, but sad that he had to endure this pitiless ordeal. Plame was not even a covert agent and had not been for some time.
Bob Novak left a legacy behind him that represented the best that conservative journalism has had to offer. I have missed his columns for the last year and have feared that this day would come, all too soon. Tim Russert, Tony Snow and now Robert Novak. We keep losing men whose shoes are too big to fill.
I never got to meet Bob Novak or even hear him speak, but I felt a profound sadness, nonetheless. I fear we will not see his kind again. Novak was an old-school reporter who was fearlessly committed to integrity. He was, however, not afraid to brandish his conservative credentials, though this did not translate to protectiveness towards Republican politicians.
Robert Novak was famous for the scoops that he uncovered, and there was a new one almost every week. I read his columns religiously. They were always interesting and he could write like nobody's business. Novak was more than your standard-issue pundit; there was clout behind what he wrote and said because of the half a century he had spent becoming acquainted with the ways of Washington.
I think I first saw Novak on Crossfire back around 2002 or so; he was representing the Right and Paul Begala the Left. Candidly, Novak was a far more gifted writer than he was a speaker; he was not as glib on his feet as some (Tucker Carlson, for instance, whom I also like and yes, Paul Begala, whom I don't so much), but he always had something worthwhile to say or cover.
One of the last memories I have is of Novak covering the South Carolina Republican primary for Fox News. McCain had just won and Novak essentially predicted that this indicated that the nomination now belonged to McCain. Sean Hannity, who was anchoring at that moment, protested that surely this didn't mean it was all over for Mitt Romney and the other hopefuls? Novak replied that he had covered Republicans for 50 years and if South Carolina GOP voters were throwing their support behind a candidate, his nomination was virtually assured. We all know how that turned out.
Novak's story of his journey to the Catholic faith from agnosticism is one of the most moving conversion stories I have ever encountered. He details this in his memoir, as well. He was approached in 1996 by a young female student who asked if he had joined the church (evidently, she knew that he had looked into it). He replied that he had not and had no intention of doing so anytime soon. Her response was, "Mr. Novak, life is short, but eternity is forever." He was so shaken by this simple witness that he began a spiritual journey that lasted until his death.
It is sad that Novak's final years were marked by the controversy of the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson non-story. Novak did nothing wrong in reporting the facts that he was given by the source he eventually disclosed: Undersecretary of State Richard Armitage. Yet, he was forced to expend $160,000 in legal fees while keeping silent as the situation unfolded. The whole thing was a sham and charade masquerading as justice, and it was fitting that Novak was ultimately cleared, but sad that he had to endure this pitiless ordeal. Plame was not even a covert agent and had not been for some time.
Bob Novak left a legacy behind him that represented the best that conservative journalism has had to offer. I have missed his columns for the last year and have feared that this day would come, all too soon. Tim Russert, Tony Snow and now Robert Novak. We keep losing men whose shoes are too big to fill.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Right Online 2009
I was not even aware of the Americans for Prosperity think tank a year ago, let alone that they had sponsored the first annual Right Online conference in Austin, TX last summer.
I first began to hear about AFP a few months ago as Glenn Beck brought different personalities from the organization onto his show. Someone invited me to become a Facebook fan of the organization, then I received a Facebook friend request from their President, Tim Phillips, followed shortly by an invitation to the second Right Online conference. The end result of this process was my presence in Pittsburgh on August 14-15 at the Station Square Sheraton right on the riverfront.
The conference kicked off at noon on Friday, 8/14. I won't go into painstaking detail over every detail that occurred, but there were a number of highlights and observations that I want to record while memory is still relatively fresh. (My laptop unfortunately contracted a virus on Saturday afternoon, probably due to the Sheraton's unsecure connection, from which it did not recover until Monday afternoon. And then I had a paper to write and work to catch up on, yada, yada, yada...thus my inability to blog about the conference until tonight!)
If there was one overarching lesson with which I came away from Right Online, it is the power of Twitter! I created my Twitter account several months ago and did well to check it briefly every couple weeks or so. I arrived in Pittsburgh following maybe 10 people on Twitter, with my own followers in the single digits. By the time I drove home to Indiana on Sunday, I was following close to 100 people and had nearly as many fellow Tweeters who had jumped aboard my Twitter rocket! And the number has steadily accelerated every day since then.
Midway through Friday afternoon, I walked around a corner at the Sheraton and who should be standing there, Blackberry in hand, but my fellow Hoosier and political pal, Kristen Luidhart...neither of us had had a clue that the other would be present, though I had noticed her Tweeting on the Right Online Tweetdeck. She warned me that Twitter is addictive, and she knew whereof she spoke. It fosters a sense of community among activists like us that is difficult to adequately portray if you haven't yet taken the plunge yourself. There is something about the immediacy and spontaneity of putting your views out there for instant comment and receiving quick feedback in real time that is quite rewarding. More on Twitter in a minute...
It was fun to see a number of people whose blogs I have followed and whose columns I have read for a number of years. John Hawkins of Right Wing News (who is also a Townhall.com columnist) was on the first panel of the day on Social Networking 101. Matt Lewis, who has broken a lot of scoops on Townhall.com over the last few years and blogs regularly at Politics Daily, was in charge of the second panel. Matt shared pointers on political blogging that will probably lead to some facelifts on this very blog in the days ahead, as soon as I can afford to expend some resources in both dollars and time. The key concept that I garnered from Matt's very interactive lecture is that "Words are not enough" when it comes to blogging. Pictures and video are the spice that adds real pleasure to a blog for the reader; they provide the hook that brings the reader back.
There were so many unexpected delights in the 28 or so hours that the conference lasted, but chief among those was the opportunity to get a bit better acquainted with Irish filmmaker Ann McElhinney. I just took a peek back at my blogs about CPAC 2009, and I see that I neglected to say a word about the presentation that she and her husband, Phelim McAleer, gave on CPAC Saturday (February 28, 2009) about their upcoming anti-global warming conspiracy documentary "Not Evil, Just Wrong." So a bit of background. Andrew Breitbart very shrewdly booked Ann and Phelim in the slot right before Ward Connerly, who directly preceded Rush Limbaugh's closing speech. I would wager that there probably were not 10 people in the ballroom that day who had ever heard of Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer, but the venue was jammed to capacity because of eagerness to hear Rush. Ann and Phelim spoke to the crowd for about an hour about their project, interspersed with clips from the film. They entered a roomful of strangers and walked off waving to 6,000 screaming fans. Yes, they are that good.
Back to Right Online...I walked up to Ann and Phelim at the hotel bar and introduced myself, saying how much I had enjoyed their speech at CPAC. We talked for a minute, then about an hour later, at Matt Lewis' workshop on Facebook & Twitter, Ann sat down in front of me and shared some of the vision she and Phelim have for their project. Ann is a ball of restless kinetic energy, like few people I have ever seen. She and Phelim have paid a price for their conversion to conservatism since they were both flaming liberals until 5 years ago when they filmed the documentary "Mine Your Own Business" and saw that the real villains of the story were not businessmen, but environmentalists who forced continued regional poverty at the expense of their own posturing.
The closing event of the day was a screening of "Not Evil, Just Wrong." The movie runs about 85 minutes. As the father of a kindergartener who came home from 2 straight weeks of Earth Day celebrations at her school this last year telling me why I needed to take care of the trees and not drive as much, I can assure you that this film is sorely needed...and that is the least of the reasons why it is MUST viewing. The movie documents the testimony of the British lawyer who took Al Gore to court for misstatements that were made in the film (the prosecution won!), as well as a founding member of Greenpeace who realized where the organization was going in the '80's and chose to make his departure. But the most poignant observation concerns the destruction that has been wrought in the name of global warming dogma, with the withholding of DDT from poor African nations. DDT is the chemical that Rachel Carson made famous in her book "Silent Spring", which in turn heavily influenced Al Gore. Carson's thesis was that DDT was a lethal chemical for birds. Not true, as it turns out, but it was enough for the anti-DDT lobby to swing into action and have it banned. Until now, other than John Stossel, I'm not sure who else has covered the fact that 30 million Africans have died from malaria because of the absence of DDT in mosquito-swarmed areas of the continent. There is much, MUCH more to this film and it debuts nationwide on Sunday, October 18. More on that in the coming weeks.
I believe, with everything in me, that I listened to the next Senator from Pennsylvania speak last Friday night. Pat Toomey gave an eloquent, impassioned and brilliant speech after our dinner. This is a warm, witty and wise man; it is easy to discern why he lost to Specter by only 4 points in a bitterly contested 2004 primary, even when the biggest of big guns (President Bush and Senator Rick Santorum, among other establishment figures) were lined up against him. Toomey understands the free enterprise system and the power of liberty in a way that Arlen Specter doesn't begin to have the capacity to grasp. He is also a pleasant man with an easy demeanor, which should stack up well against the man who is reportedly feared by his staff as one of the meanest bosses on Capitol Hill. As conservative online media personality David All recently Tweeted, "Arlen Specter typifies absolutely everything that is wrong with Washington." Toomey cracked that he had hoped and planned to run against Arlen Specter in the Republican Party, but he had no idea he would drive him clear out of the party! He was interrupted by repeated ovations from a very enthusiastic crowd and closed with a heartfelt homage to "those who will have to pay for all of these new government programs....people that somehow are forgotten about in all of the wheeling and dealing in Washington." (Not verbatim, but close.)
Saturday morning was the time slot allotted to the celebrity speakers. Erick Erickson, of Redstate.com, has built such a huge following with one of the best blogs in cyberspace and Ed Morrissey of Hotair.com has crafted a blog that now surpasses the Daily Kos in readership! (Somehow, you haven't yet seen that headline in the New York Times or heard Chris Matthews mentioning it, have you?) They were warmly welcomed by the Saturday crowd, as they deserved to be. Steve Moore, from the "Wall Street Journal", Grover Norquist from Americans for Tax Reform and Jim Pinkerton from Fox News, gave us some commentary on the current political situation and Michelle Malkin closed out the morning session with an animated speech. As the author of the current #1 New York Times bestseller Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies, Malkin was greeted with joyful cheers from the eager crowd. She is a capable speaker, as well as a gifted writer and tireless blogger.
The day closed with a panel on "Map to Victory: How the Right Can Win Online." It was moderated by Rob Bluey, with Matt Lewis and Erick Erickson as participants. This was one of the most fascinating segments of the whole conference as Lewis and Erickson shared their ideas on how to most effectively drive opinion and dialogue in the blogosphere and took questions from the crowd.
I promised more about Twitter, so I'll close this post with this story. By the time the conference was over, I was Tweeting with the best of them throughout each session. This final panel was broadcast LIVE on C-Span. As I was sitting there minding my own business, I looked down at my computer screen and saw a Tweet directly to me from a Jenci Spradlin in Tennessee. She had seen me on TV when the camera went to a questioner in the crowd, so was jumping on Twitter to tell me that she had glimpsed me out in the audience! If this isn't the ultimate illustration of the power of multiple media forums, I don't know what is. I have gotten more than a few chuckles out of that in the days since...and not to Tweet my own horn or anything (sorry for the bad pun), but Jenci also got a small donation for her Breast Cancer Awareness walk this week that she wouldn't have gotten if she hadn't met a new Twitter buddy that she saw on TV!
I first began to hear about AFP a few months ago as Glenn Beck brought different personalities from the organization onto his show. Someone invited me to become a Facebook fan of the organization, then I received a Facebook friend request from their President, Tim Phillips, followed shortly by an invitation to the second Right Online conference. The end result of this process was my presence in Pittsburgh on August 14-15 at the Station Square Sheraton right on the riverfront.
The conference kicked off at noon on Friday, 8/14. I won't go into painstaking detail over every detail that occurred, but there were a number of highlights and observations that I want to record while memory is still relatively fresh. (My laptop unfortunately contracted a virus on Saturday afternoon, probably due to the Sheraton's unsecure connection, from which it did not recover until Monday afternoon. And then I had a paper to write and work to catch up on, yada, yada, yada...thus my inability to blog about the conference until tonight!)
If there was one overarching lesson with which I came away from Right Online, it is the power of Twitter! I created my Twitter account several months ago and did well to check it briefly every couple weeks or so. I arrived in Pittsburgh following maybe 10 people on Twitter, with my own followers in the single digits. By the time I drove home to Indiana on Sunday, I was following close to 100 people and had nearly as many fellow Tweeters who had jumped aboard my Twitter rocket! And the number has steadily accelerated every day since then.
Midway through Friday afternoon, I walked around a corner at the Sheraton and who should be standing there, Blackberry in hand, but my fellow Hoosier and political pal, Kristen Luidhart...neither of us had had a clue that the other would be present, though I had noticed her Tweeting on the Right Online Tweetdeck. She warned me that Twitter is addictive, and she knew whereof she spoke. It fosters a sense of community among activists like us that is difficult to adequately portray if you haven't yet taken the plunge yourself. There is something about the immediacy and spontaneity of putting your views out there for instant comment and receiving quick feedback in real time that is quite rewarding. More on Twitter in a minute...
It was fun to see a number of people whose blogs I have followed and whose columns I have read for a number of years. John Hawkins of Right Wing News (who is also a Townhall.com columnist) was on the first panel of the day on Social Networking 101. Matt Lewis, who has broken a lot of scoops on Townhall.com over the last few years and blogs regularly at Politics Daily, was in charge of the second panel. Matt shared pointers on political blogging that will probably lead to some facelifts on this very blog in the days ahead, as soon as I can afford to expend some resources in both dollars and time. The key concept that I garnered from Matt's very interactive lecture is that "Words are not enough" when it comes to blogging. Pictures and video are the spice that adds real pleasure to a blog for the reader; they provide the hook that brings the reader back.
There were so many unexpected delights in the 28 or so hours that the conference lasted, but chief among those was the opportunity to get a bit better acquainted with Irish filmmaker Ann McElhinney. I just took a peek back at my blogs about CPAC 2009, and I see that I neglected to say a word about the presentation that she and her husband, Phelim McAleer, gave on CPAC Saturday (February 28, 2009) about their upcoming anti-global warming conspiracy documentary "Not Evil, Just Wrong." So a bit of background. Andrew Breitbart very shrewdly booked Ann and Phelim in the slot right before Ward Connerly, who directly preceded Rush Limbaugh's closing speech. I would wager that there probably were not 10 people in the ballroom that day who had ever heard of Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer, but the venue was jammed to capacity because of eagerness to hear Rush. Ann and Phelim spoke to the crowd for about an hour about their project, interspersed with clips from the film. They entered a roomful of strangers and walked off waving to 6,000 screaming fans. Yes, they are that good.
Back to Right Online...I walked up to Ann and Phelim at the hotel bar and introduced myself, saying how much I had enjoyed their speech at CPAC. We talked for a minute, then about an hour later, at Matt Lewis' workshop on Facebook & Twitter, Ann sat down in front of me and shared some of the vision she and Phelim have for their project. Ann is a ball of restless kinetic energy, like few people I have ever seen. She and Phelim have paid a price for their conversion to conservatism since they were both flaming liberals until 5 years ago when they filmed the documentary "Mine Your Own Business" and saw that the real villains of the story were not businessmen, but environmentalists who forced continued regional poverty at the expense of their own posturing.
The closing event of the day was a screening of "Not Evil, Just Wrong." The movie runs about 85 minutes. As the father of a kindergartener who came home from 2 straight weeks of Earth Day celebrations at her school this last year telling me why I needed to take care of the trees and not drive as much, I can assure you that this film is sorely needed...and that is the least of the reasons why it is MUST viewing. The movie documents the testimony of the British lawyer who took Al Gore to court for misstatements that were made in the film (the prosecution won!), as well as a founding member of Greenpeace who realized where the organization was going in the '80's and chose to make his departure. But the most poignant observation concerns the destruction that has been wrought in the name of global warming dogma, with the withholding of DDT from poor African nations. DDT is the chemical that Rachel Carson made famous in her book "Silent Spring", which in turn heavily influenced Al Gore. Carson's thesis was that DDT was a lethal chemical for birds. Not true, as it turns out, but it was enough for the anti-DDT lobby to swing into action and have it banned. Until now, other than John Stossel, I'm not sure who else has covered the fact that 30 million Africans have died from malaria because of the absence of DDT in mosquito-swarmed areas of the continent. There is much, MUCH more to this film and it debuts nationwide on Sunday, October 18. More on that in the coming weeks.
I believe, with everything in me, that I listened to the next Senator from Pennsylvania speak last Friday night. Pat Toomey gave an eloquent, impassioned and brilliant speech after our dinner. This is a warm, witty and wise man; it is easy to discern why he lost to Specter by only 4 points in a bitterly contested 2004 primary, even when the biggest of big guns (President Bush and Senator Rick Santorum, among other establishment figures) were lined up against him. Toomey understands the free enterprise system and the power of liberty in a way that Arlen Specter doesn't begin to have the capacity to grasp. He is also a pleasant man with an easy demeanor, which should stack up well against the man who is reportedly feared by his staff as one of the meanest bosses on Capitol Hill. As conservative online media personality David All recently Tweeted, "Arlen Specter typifies absolutely everything that is wrong with Washington." Toomey cracked that he had hoped and planned to run against Arlen Specter in the Republican Party, but he had no idea he would drive him clear out of the party! He was interrupted by repeated ovations from a very enthusiastic crowd and closed with a heartfelt homage to "those who will have to pay for all of these new government programs....people that somehow are forgotten about in all of the wheeling and dealing in Washington." (Not verbatim, but close.)
Saturday morning was the time slot allotted to the celebrity speakers. Erick Erickson, of Redstate.com, has built such a huge following with one of the best blogs in cyberspace and Ed Morrissey of Hotair.com has crafted a blog that now surpasses the Daily Kos in readership! (Somehow, you haven't yet seen that headline in the New York Times or heard Chris Matthews mentioning it, have you?) They were warmly welcomed by the Saturday crowd, as they deserved to be. Steve Moore, from the "Wall Street Journal", Grover Norquist from Americans for Tax Reform and Jim Pinkerton from Fox News, gave us some commentary on the current political situation and Michelle Malkin closed out the morning session with an animated speech. As the author of the current #1 New York Times bestseller Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies, Malkin was greeted with joyful cheers from the eager crowd. She is a capable speaker, as well as a gifted writer and tireless blogger.
The day closed with a panel on "Map to Victory: How the Right Can Win Online." It was moderated by Rob Bluey, with Matt Lewis and Erick Erickson as participants. This was one of the most fascinating segments of the whole conference as Lewis and Erickson shared their ideas on how to most effectively drive opinion and dialogue in the blogosphere and took questions from the crowd.
I promised more about Twitter, so I'll close this post with this story. By the time the conference was over, I was Tweeting with the best of them throughout each session. This final panel was broadcast LIVE on C-Span. As I was sitting there minding my own business, I looked down at my computer screen and saw a Tweet directly to me from a Jenci Spradlin in Tennessee. She had seen me on TV when the camera went to a questioner in the crowd, so was jumping on Twitter to tell me that she had glimpsed me out in the audience! If this isn't the ultimate illustration of the power of multiple media forums, I don't know what is. I have gotten more than a few chuckles out of that in the days since...and not to Tweet my own horn or anything (sorry for the bad pun), but Jenci also got a small donation for her Breast Cancer Awareness walk this week that she wouldn't have gotten if she hadn't met a new Twitter buddy that she saw on TV!
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Donnelly town hall on August 12
I was pleased to be able to attend Congressman Joe Donnelly's town hall meeting yesterday at the Inventrek Technology Park here in Kokomo. As soon as I turned the corner onto Home Avenue and could see the parking lot, I knew this would be different from any previous town hall I had patronized in the past. I had never seen this parking lot even close to capacity, and by the time the session began, it was.
I have come to several conclusions, some of which I reached during the town hall; other thoughts came to me after the event was finished.
ACORN seemingly had been notified of the meeting to a far greater extent than anyone opposing the bill had been. They were very well organized with professionally printed signs, several tables with staffed workers and a good-sized pavilion with brochures and bumper stickers. There was even a handmade sign attached to one of the tables that advised us "Jesus would vote "YES." Nice. Mind you, the ACORN logo was nowhere to be found, but their fingerprints were all over everything.
In spite of the above, the crowd swelled to what I would estimate was around 400 and in the end, was 80/20 against the bill. The variations in the intelligence of the respective questions were staggering. A representative sampling of supporters of the bill included questions such as "Congressman, what is the biggest lie you have heard about the health care bill?", which Donnelly wisely dodged by saying that he really didn't want to use such language since he believed that everyone there that day was concerned about their country. Donnelly also did not reply to another man who went into a diatribe about his own 6-year span of medical examinations, which seemed to have no real narrative thread, since his health checked out fine all the way through the story and which concluded with this brilliant consummation: "I don't know much about democracy or socialism or communism...but it seems to me that here in America, we ought to get all of this for free!" He was roundly booed by a robust majority which included yours truly. (And yes, I did try to behave, though it was difficult at times.)
The questions from opponents were substantive and varied in intensity from cordial to heated, but not rude. There were, of course, varying levels of articulateness from the questioners. I was especially impressed by a middle-aged military wife who asked the Congressman to please tell Nancy Pelosi that she was exercising her rights as an American by being present and opposing the bill, a far cry from Pelosi's accusation of un-American activity. Every major fear about the bill was repeatedly and eloquently addressed, from the "death panel" rumors to the out-of-control costs of government spending to increasing government oversight to denial of care based on perceived life value.
Joe Donnelly, who defeated a good Congressman in 2006 (Chris Chocola), is not someone with whom I feel a natural affinity, but my hat is off to him for facing his constituents and doing so in a way that was courteous and open-minded. I really don't know which way he will ultimately vote; he is the classic example of a blue-dog Democrat as I described in another recent post. He was asked if he was prepared to vote for the bill even it meant political suicide. His answer was that however he voted, his position on any legislation is that he had a job before he went to Congress and he'll have one when he isn't there anymore, so his vote is never based on what it might do to his political future. I hope that reply was a genuine reflection of his heart. He had no unkind words to say about private initiative, but he did fall back on what seems to be a new talking point in the town hall meetings. When questioners would protest about the cost, he repeatedly would ask, "What do you think about Medicare? That's a government program. Do you want to get rid of it?" Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) pulled the same tactic on O'Reilly last night. This ploy may be effective if people don't understand that it is government intervention that has put us here in the first place, but of course, Medicare has to be reformed if it is going to last; it currently has a $40 trillion unfunded liability, which Donnelly certainly didn't choose to mention. Knowledge of the free market and economic cause and effect was not, shall we say, manifestly on display from the Congressman, but I can't say I was terribly surprised at that.
We have real hope here of blocking this, but if the Congressman votes "Yes" in the fall, he will do so against the wishes of the vast majority of his constituents who have done their civic duty and made their voice heard.
I have come to several conclusions, some of which I reached during the town hall; other thoughts came to me after the event was finished.
ACORN seemingly had been notified of the meeting to a far greater extent than anyone opposing the bill had been. They were very well organized with professionally printed signs, several tables with staffed workers and a good-sized pavilion with brochures and bumper stickers. There was even a handmade sign attached to one of the tables that advised us "Jesus would vote "YES." Nice. Mind you, the ACORN logo was nowhere to be found, but their fingerprints were all over everything.
In spite of the above, the crowd swelled to what I would estimate was around 400 and in the end, was 80/20 against the bill. The variations in the intelligence of the respective questions were staggering. A representative sampling of supporters of the bill included questions such as "Congressman, what is the biggest lie you have heard about the health care bill?", which Donnelly wisely dodged by saying that he really didn't want to use such language since he believed that everyone there that day was concerned about their country. Donnelly also did not reply to another man who went into a diatribe about his own 6-year span of medical examinations, which seemed to have no real narrative thread, since his health checked out fine all the way through the story and which concluded with this brilliant consummation: "I don't know much about democracy or socialism or communism...but it seems to me that here in America, we ought to get all of this for free!" He was roundly booed by a robust majority which included yours truly. (And yes, I did try to behave, though it was difficult at times.)
The questions from opponents were substantive and varied in intensity from cordial to heated, but not rude. There were, of course, varying levels of articulateness from the questioners. I was especially impressed by a middle-aged military wife who asked the Congressman to please tell Nancy Pelosi that she was exercising her rights as an American by being present and opposing the bill, a far cry from Pelosi's accusation of un-American activity. Every major fear about the bill was repeatedly and eloquently addressed, from the "death panel" rumors to the out-of-control costs of government spending to increasing government oversight to denial of care based on perceived life value.
Joe Donnelly, who defeated a good Congressman in 2006 (Chris Chocola), is not someone with whom I feel a natural affinity, but my hat is off to him for facing his constituents and doing so in a way that was courteous and open-minded. I really don't know which way he will ultimately vote; he is the classic example of a blue-dog Democrat as I described in another recent post. He was asked if he was prepared to vote for the bill even it meant political suicide. His answer was that however he voted, his position on any legislation is that he had a job before he went to Congress and he'll have one when he isn't there anymore, so his vote is never based on what it might do to his political future. I hope that reply was a genuine reflection of his heart. He had no unkind words to say about private initiative, but he did fall back on what seems to be a new talking point in the town hall meetings. When questioners would protest about the cost, he repeatedly would ask, "What do you think about Medicare? That's a government program. Do you want to get rid of it?" Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) pulled the same tactic on O'Reilly last night. This ploy may be effective if people don't understand that it is government intervention that has put us here in the first place, but of course, Medicare has to be reformed if it is going to last; it currently has a $40 trillion unfunded liability, which Donnelly certainly didn't choose to mention. Knowledge of the free market and economic cause and effect was not, shall we say, manifestly on display from the Congressman, but I can't say I was terribly surprised at that.
We have real hope here of blocking this, but if the Congressman votes "Yes" in the fall, he will do so against the wishes of the vast majority of his constituents who have done their civic duty and made their voice heard.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Health Care Townhalls
As I began to type the above title, the computer wanted to automatically populate it with "Health Care Deja Vu." I had forgotten about that blog post, which I probably put up about a month ago. I have to smilingly wonder how noteworthy my blogs are when I forget about them myself. What can I expect from my readers??? Nevertheless, I had no idea when I wrote that post how prophetic it would turn out to be. The parallels to the overreach of the Clintons in 1993-94 are just stunning. And if anything, the heat is dialed up even higher than it was then.
The health care town hall meetings and the drama they are spawning are the lead story on every newscast. These may not be fun times, but they sure are momentous. It is quite a feeling to know with certainty that we are seeing scenes unfold on our TV and computer screens that will be recorded for posterity in the history books...unless the revisionists carry the day.
Times like these give me hope that the American people still have a reserve of outrage left in them that can be called up when it truly is needed. And make no mistake about it; there is a time for outrage, just as there is a time to lay down arms. I just watched a clip again from the town hall that Arlen Specter held earlier today; a 35-year-old lady in a blue shirt told the Senator that she had never been interested in politics, but "you have awakened a sleeping giant." Her sentiment was echoed in a variety of ways around the room.
The memo has clearly gone out from the White House that attacks along the lines of the "un-American" labelling and mentions of "swastikas", ala Nancy Pelosi, must no longer be leveled. Specter, the new Democrat, was quite subdued and complimentary of his audience, even though faced with friction. (One presumes he also is acquainted with Pennsylvania polls, which show him tied with former Representative Pat Toomey in a general election match-up.)
Obama held a town hall in New Hampshire today, his first in the Granite State since 2007 (hat tip to the Wall Street Journal for that little factoid). He also tried to convey a less belligerent tone than he demonstrated at the Creigh Deeds fundraiser in Virginia last week. Fox News reported, though, that he slipped up when he attributed the segment in the health care bill on "end of life consultations" to Georgia's junior Republican Senator Johnny Isakson, who later vociferously denied any involvement in the bill at all.
There is such a potpourri of action surrounding this issue that it requires breathless effort to keep up on it all.
On the periphery of it all is the undeniable conclusion that the media has dug in their heels. Do a Youtube check on Chris Matthew's interview with Tim Phillips, the Director of the advocacy organization, Americans for Prosperity, and see what your impressions are. Matthews is so rude and abrasive that it is difficult to sit through the whole 9+ minutes of footage. I posted this on my Facebook Wall, with a note wondering what has happened to Chris Matthews? I used to enjoy his show; it was fun and had a light tone to it, even if I didn't share his political bias on some things. Today, it is hard to recognize the old Matthews for the vicious, angry diatribes that get spewed on a regular basis. I don't watch anymore, but I still hear clips from the show here and there.
It is unwise to make any predictions at this point, but when Dick Durbin is openly admitting that the public option may not last as part of the health care bill, we have to assume that we have scored a victory here. This is nothing short of amazing, when considering the odds against such a win: 60 Democrat votes in the Senate and a large majority in the House.
But we have a long way to go before we call truce.
The health care town hall meetings and the drama they are spawning are the lead story on every newscast. These may not be fun times, but they sure are momentous. It is quite a feeling to know with certainty that we are seeing scenes unfold on our TV and computer screens that will be recorded for posterity in the history books...unless the revisionists carry the day.
Times like these give me hope that the American people still have a reserve of outrage left in them that can be called up when it truly is needed. And make no mistake about it; there is a time for outrage, just as there is a time to lay down arms. I just watched a clip again from the town hall that Arlen Specter held earlier today; a 35-year-old lady in a blue shirt told the Senator that she had never been interested in politics, but "you have awakened a sleeping giant." Her sentiment was echoed in a variety of ways around the room.
The memo has clearly gone out from the White House that attacks along the lines of the "un-American" labelling and mentions of "swastikas", ala Nancy Pelosi, must no longer be leveled. Specter, the new Democrat, was quite subdued and complimentary of his audience, even though faced with friction. (One presumes he also is acquainted with Pennsylvania polls, which show him tied with former Representative Pat Toomey in a general election match-up.)
Obama held a town hall in New Hampshire today, his first in the Granite State since 2007 (hat tip to the Wall Street Journal for that little factoid). He also tried to convey a less belligerent tone than he demonstrated at the Creigh Deeds fundraiser in Virginia last week. Fox News reported, though, that he slipped up when he attributed the segment in the health care bill on "end of life consultations" to Georgia's junior Republican Senator Johnny Isakson, who later vociferously denied any involvement in the bill at all.
There is such a potpourri of action surrounding this issue that it requires breathless effort to keep up on it all.
On the periphery of it all is the undeniable conclusion that the media has dug in their heels. Do a Youtube check on Chris Matthew's interview with Tim Phillips, the Director of the advocacy organization, Americans for Prosperity, and see what your impressions are. Matthews is so rude and abrasive that it is difficult to sit through the whole 9+ minutes of footage. I posted this on my Facebook Wall, with a note wondering what has happened to Chris Matthews? I used to enjoy his show; it was fun and had a light tone to it, even if I didn't share his political bias on some things. Today, it is hard to recognize the old Matthews for the vicious, angry diatribes that get spewed on a regular basis. I don't watch anymore, but I still hear clips from the show here and there.
It is unwise to make any predictions at this point, but when Dick Durbin is openly admitting that the public option may not last as part of the health care bill, we have to assume that we have scored a victory here. This is nothing short of amazing, when considering the odds against such a win: 60 Democrat votes in the Senate and a large majority in the House.
But we have a long way to go before we call truce.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Kokomo gets stimulus money
I had just finished checking out at the U-Scan line at Kroger when the headline caught my peripheral vision. I swiveled quickly, in time to see the front page of the Kokomo Tribune my fellow grocery buyer had purchased. There on the front page, in gi-normous block letters of multi-point font: DELPHI WINS BIG.
The story went on to detail the $89 million that President Obama had just announced that our local Delphi plant would be receiving.
For me, the verbiage of the title spoke volumes. How exactly did this "win" take place?
Democrat Congressman Joe Donnelly, of Indiana's Second District, has an answer:
"I voted for the stimulus, and this is why I voted for it. All the folks who say nothing’s happening ... now $90 million has come to Kokomo for long-term growth... I’m just really excited about this development. It just further affirms the greatness of Kokomo.”
The emphasis is mine and it is purposeful. Joe Donnelly is a blue-dog Democrat, as close to a conservative as the Democratic Party has to offer today. He is pro-life, at least in some instances and he voted against the Cap & Trade bill.
Yet, his core business/finance philosophy is solidly within the Democratic Party mainstream. To Donnelly, a "win" for Delphi means that they have been awarded the lottery ticket of government largesse. And this proves greatness? HOW? At one time, greatness was defined in the automotive industry by production on the free market of cars that people wanted to purchase by companies that remained competitive the old-fashioned way: cost analysis, insightful leadership and shrewd management of the bottom line.
I still believe that a "win" is predicated on actual achievement in a field where there is tangible measurement of achievement and the lack thereof. But to the Kokomo Tribune and Joe Donnelly, my vision must seem desperately outmoded.
Delphi will hum along a while longer, perhaps even for a few years, with an infusion of cash like that. And Kokomo residents will breathe a collective sigh of relief. But not only have we simply postponed our day of reckoning; we celebrate at the expense of our children and grandchildren who have been stuck with a credit card statement for $89 million plus interest.
The story went on to detail the $89 million that President Obama had just announced that our local Delphi plant would be receiving.
For me, the verbiage of the title spoke volumes. How exactly did this "win" take place?
Democrat Congressman Joe Donnelly, of Indiana's Second District, has an answer:
"I voted for the stimulus, and this is why I voted for it. All the folks who say nothing’s happening ... now $90 million has come to Kokomo for long-term growth... I’m just really excited about this development. It just further affirms the greatness of Kokomo.”
The emphasis is mine and it is purposeful. Joe Donnelly is a blue-dog Democrat, as close to a conservative as the Democratic Party has to offer today. He is pro-life, at least in some instances and he voted against the Cap & Trade bill.
Yet, his core business/finance philosophy is solidly within the Democratic Party mainstream. To Donnelly, a "win" for Delphi means that they have been awarded the lottery ticket of government largesse. And this proves greatness? HOW? At one time, greatness was defined in the automotive industry by production on the free market of cars that people wanted to purchase by companies that remained competitive the old-fashioned way: cost analysis, insightful leadership and shrewd management of the bottom line.
I still believe that a "win" is predicated on actual achievement in a field where there is tangible measurement of achievement and the lack thereof. But to the Kokomo Tribune and Joe Donnelly, my vision must seem desperately outmoded.
Delphi will hum along a while longer, perhaps even for a few years, with an infusion of cash like that. And Kokomo residents will breathe a collective sigh of relief. But not only have we simply postponed our day of reckoning; we celebrate at the expense of our children and grandchildren who have been stuck with a credit card statement for $89 million plus interest.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Birthing a distraction
Barack Obama should release his birth certificate. But while he continues to hold out, the Birthers need to give it up.
I have watched with some perplexity as some continue to be fixated on this birth certificate "issue." It has been clanging around in the ether for so long now that I can't even recall verbatim all of the quotes that I have heard from various reliable sources that apply to this discussion.
I do remember the first serious column I read on Obama's birth certificate, by Ron Kessler of Newsmax. Newsmax is a conservative magazine with street cred and if you want to read his column "Obama Was Born In the United States", you can do so here. The element of this exposure that I find most noteworthy is that Philip Berg, the lawyer who initially brought the birth certificate lawsuit to court, is a certifiable wingnut who also believes that Bush and Cheney knew about and even orchestrated the events of 9/11 in advance of their occurrence.
Bill O'Reilly talked about the Birthers last week; his position is that they have a right to say what they want and focus on what they feel is worth their time, but that it is a closed issue. The Factor investigated it all at some point last year and found nothing worth pursuing.
I wish I had been jotting down notes back in January when I was in Louisville and caught Michael Medved's radio show for a few minutes. Medved did a masterful job of tracing the thread of all that would have had to take place, for no reason at that time, for Obama's mother to have gone to Kenya as a poor and very pregnant young woman just to give birth to her son. For what reason? So that he wouldn't be born in the United States? If so, why? This is how conspiracy theories collapse under their own weight.
Erick Erickson, who runs one of the best political blogs at www.redstate.com, very accurately labels this whole argument as a distraction. His thesis is that Obama may very well have a paper birth certificate, but that he is pursuing a dual strategy by toying with those who are obsessed with this issue and then hoping to brand all conservatives as angry maniacs that have their priorities out of sync.
Here is my final point: Even if Obama's birth certificate weren't legit, what happens at that time? Impeachment? That would never fly in this House of Representatives. It would be far more effective for all truly engaged citizens to zero in on Obama's policy failures, as well as weighing in with constitutional ideas for the future, rather than pursuing a goal that is ultimately hopeless. This is another Vince Foster smoking gun, to coin a Clinton-era incident; if any proof ever emerges, it will show that the Birthers had embarked on an ill-fated quest all along.
I have watched with some perplexity as some continue to be fixated on this birth certificate "issue." It has been clanging around in the ether for so long now that I can't even recall verbatim all of the quotes that I have heard from various reliable sources that apply to this discussion.
I do remember the first serious column I read on Obama's birth certificate, by Ron Kessler of Newsmax. Newsmax is a conservative magazine with street cred and if you want to read his column "Obama Was Born In the United States", you can do so here. The element of this exposure that I find most noteworthy is that Philip Berg, the lawyer who initially brought the birth certificate lawsuit to court, is a certifiable wingnut who also believes that Bush and Cheney knew about and even orchestrated the events of 9/11 in advance of their occurrence.
Bill O'Reilly talked about the Birthers last week; his position is that they have a right to say what they want and focus on what they feel is worth their time, but that it is a closed issue. The Factor investigated it all at some point last year and found nothing worth pursuing.
I wish I had been jotting down notes back in January when I was in Louisville and caught Michael Medved's radio show for a few minutes. Medved did a masterful job of tracing the thread of all that would have had to take place, for no reason at that time, for Obama's mother to have gone to Kenya as a poor and very pregnant young woman just to give birth to her son. For what reason? So that he wouldn't be born in the United States? If so, why? This is how conspiracy theories collapse under their own weight.
Erick Erickson, who runs one of the best political blogs at www.redstate.com, very accurately labels this whole argument as a distraction. His thesis is that Obama may very well have a paper birth certificate, but that he is pursuing a dual strategy by toying with those who are obsessed with this issue and then hoping to brand all conservatives as angry maniacs that have their priorities out of sync.
Here is my final point: Even if Obama's birth certificate weren't legit, what happens at that time? Impeachment? That would never fly in this House of Representatives. It would be far more effective for all truly engaged citizens to zero in on Obama's policy failures, as well as weighing in with constitutional ideas for the future, rather than pursuing a goal that is ultimately hopeless. This is another Vince Foster smoking gun, to coin a Clinton-era incident; if any proof ever emerges, it will show that the Birthers had embarked on an ill-fated quest all along.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Economics ignoramuses
Our esteemed Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has come out swinging again, blasting the insurance companies as "villains." Reuters reported on Thursday that Pelosi had accused the insurance companies of conspiring to kill Obamacare (oh, if only) and in the process, uttered the following:
"Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure...They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening."
It has been a decade or so since I first heard Rush Limbaugh use the phrase "a glittering jewel of colossal ignorance" to describe Rosie O'Donnell. I fell in love with the term immediately, and would like to fondly extend it at this time to San Francisco's own Nancy Pelosi.
I would like to, but I would be doing her a kindness in labeling her rhetoric as the offshoot of a mere lack of adequate knowledge. Pelosi knows full well what she is doing in falling back on the tried and true tactic of blaming the rich or vilifying "big business" for the results of her own failed pet projects.
Private insurance companies offer the best possible protection against catastrophe of which a consumer can avail himself. Like any business, they have to earn a profit to stay afloat. This is done by bringing enough people into the insurance pool who fear the results of being caught in a disastrous circumstance that those who actually encounter such a dilemma have enough dollars to avoid being soaked.
Thomas Sowell, with the pungently common sense that is his trademark, raised some very salient questions in a column last week that counter Pelosi's reckless charges:
With both common sense and economic analysis saying that Obama cannot expand government medical care without expanding the already runaway federal deficit, it is quite a trick to get the public to believe otherwise — a big challenge requiring big distractions...
Insurance companies are [a] distraction and a scapegoat because they do not insure "pre-existing conditions." Stop and think about it: If you could wait until you got sick to take out health insurance, why would you buy that insurance while you are well?
You could avoid paying all those premiums and then — after you got sick — take out health insurance and let the premiums paid by other people pay for your medical treatment.
That is not "bringing down the cost of health care." It is sticking somebody else with paying those costs. So is taxing "the rich." So is passing on those costs to your children and grandchildren through government deficit spending.
"Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure...They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening."
It has been a decade or so since I first heard Rush Limbaugh use the phrase "a glittering jewel of colossal ignorance" to describe Rosie O'Donnell. I fell in love with the term immediately, and would like to fondly extend it at this time to San Francisco's own Nancy Pelosi.
I would like to, but I would be doing her a kindness in labeling her rhetoric as the offshoot of a mere lack of adequate knowledge. Pelosi knows full well what she is doing in falling back on the tried and true tactic of blaming the rich or vilifying "big business" for the results of her own failed pet projects.
Private insurance companies offer the best possible protection against catastrophe of which a consumer can avail himself. Like any business, they have to earn a profit to stay afloat. This is done by bringing enough people into the insurance pool who fear the results of being caught in a disastrous circumstance that those who actually encounter such a dilemma have enough dollars to avoid being soaked.
Thomas Sowell, with the pungently common sense that is his trademark, raised some very salient questions in a column last week that counter Pelosi's reckless charges:
With both common sense and economic analysis saying that Obama cannot expand government medical care without expanding the already runaway federal deficit, it is quite a trick to get the public to believe otherwise — a big challenge requiring big distractions...
Insurance companies are [a] distraction and a scapegoat because they do not insure "pre-existing conditions." Stop and think about it: If you could wait until you got sick to take out health insurance, why would you buy that insurance while you are well?
You could avoid paying all those premiums and then — after you got sick — take out health insurance and let the premiums paid by other people pay for your medical treatment.
That is not "bringing down the cost of health care." It is sticking somebody else with paying those costs. So is taxing "the rich." So is passing on those costs to your children and grandchildren through government deficit spending.
More and more people are catching onto this, which is exactly why Obamacare is tanking in the polls, even as a health care bill was passed in a House committee on a 30-28 party-line vote late last night.
Contemplate a few possibilities with me:
1. It is more than likely that a politician who constantly claims to speak for "the American people" cares very little about what the American people actually think about a given subject, but is desperate to hold onto his power base, which is sustained by the Washington gravy trough.
2. That same politician has usually never met a payroll and signed paychecks every two weeks for any employees, while trying to decide what kind of health insurance plan they can afford.
3. Trial lawyers, which form a huge component of the Democratic party base, have exacerbated health care costs for decades now by continuous malpractice suits. Some of these are valid, but many of them are frivolous and, as a result, have driven up malpractice insurance premiums. I wouldn't hold my breath expecting tort reform any time soon out of these Congress, though or even entertained as a quasi-serious notion.
4. Could it be that that "filthy rich businessman" may actually be a person who compensates his employees well, is a contributing member of his community and actually has incorporated some economic principles into his business dealings that work in the real world where the requirement not to deficit spend has to actually be met? Not to mention demand for a product that people want to buy and on which they are willing to spend hard-earned dollars?
The time has come to begin to examine preconceived templates. Yet, in spite of the lack of evidence, we embrace the dictates of a biased media and phony politicians, rather than doing the hard work of understanding the economic principles that actually keep the world functioning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
