Whenever I hear people talking about "liberal ideas," I am always astounded that men should love to fool themselves with empty sounds. An idea should never be liberal; it must be vigorous, positive, and without loose ends so that it may fulfill its divine mission and be productive. The proper place for liberality is in the realm of the emotions.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Elizabeth Edwards, RIP
The estranged wife of former North Carolina US Senator and 2004 Vice Presidential nominee John Edwards died today from complications of breast cancer. Elizabeth was, in her own right, an able lawyer and a passionate progressive, concerned about the issues of poverty and health care.
We conservatives do not dispute the sincerity of Ms. Edwards' motives or the worthiness of her goals; we disagree with the approach and the objectives. We prefer a minimalist approach to federal policy, which cultivates an individual's self-reliance and accountability and does not encourage moral hazard, in particular an undue, indefinite dependence on the efforts and resources of others. Divisive, zero-sum rhetoric does not enable the self-actualization of other people.
Ms. Edwards died surrounded by her loved ones, including three surviving children, in her family home. My thoughts and prayers are with her family.
Helen Thomas: Sadly Undermining Her Own Legacy
Ninety-year-old Helen Thomas, an American of Lebanese descent, once a permanent fixture at White House press conferences, was forced to resign this past June over outrageous comments, telling a rabbi on videotape that Jews in Israel (which she called "Palestine") should go back to their prior ancestral home country.
There are, in my judgment, two separate issues: (1) the ability to express one's opinion, however unpopular or unfair it may be; and (2) a professional code of ethics. I don't believe in political correctness or political spin; Helen Thomas is entitled to her objectionable views. But I would argue, at least in regards to the media, any journalist has a professional responsibility to the truth--the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Anything discussed which is subjective or judgmental in nature should be explicitly addressed: Helen was not questioned by the rabbi because she was a random senior citizen walking down the city street; she was interviewed because she has been a correspondent working through 10 administrations.
On December 2, Helen Thomas gave a speech to a cheering Arab-American audience in Dearborn, MI, including these provocative comments:
We are owned by propagandists against the Arabs. There's no question about that. Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question in my opinion. They put their money where there mouth is…We're being pushed into a wrong direction in every way.Helen Thomas lashed out against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, implying that this "Zionist conspiracy" was the real motivation. One of the immediate results of Thomas' latest kerfuffle was the cancellation of a namesake diversity award from her alma mater, Detroit-based Wayne State. Helen Thomas immediately counterattacked the decision, accusing the university of being hypocritical with respect to honoring the First Amendment and the concept of academic freedom.
As a former professor, I want to comment on the academic freedom charge; it seems to me that the concept of academic freedom has been distorted to include uncivil rants by dubious academicians like Ward Churchill. In particular, it fundamentally deals with controversies intrinsic to an academic discipline (say, novel theories challenging the status quo) which a professor may introduce to his classes or in publications, not to politically exploit a captive student audience. For Helen Thomas to use "academic freedom" to dignify long-discredited conspiracy theories and bias against the Jewish people is unconscionable. Jews have been persecuted for centuries by people saying the same types of things as Helen Thomas; she is not introducing anything new under the sun, just the same old, same old self-serving victimization rhetoric.
It's clear that Helen Thomas sees herself as some sort of profile in courage. Hardly. What she has done has not only called into question her contributions as a high-profile journalist but raised questions about the profession's commitment to professional and ethical standards. It's not enough for a university or two to cancel sporadic appearances or awards; we need to see journalists take a stand to distance themselves from Ms. Thomas' disgraceful behavior.
Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, But Names...
I know that Sean Hannity will pounce on the latest outrageous thing out of the mouth of progressives; I myself prefer to discuss ideas rather than uncivil behavior by politicians, but some of the rhetoric is totally unnecessary and over the top. First, there was this statement last Friday by Senator Menendez (D-NJ) regarding negotiating with the GOP over the Class Warfare Tax Cut Act:
Do you allow yourself to be held hostage and get something done for the sake of getting something done, when in fact it might be perverse to the ultimate results? It's almost like the question of do you negotiate with terrorists?Now here comes the suave, inspirational "yes, we can", "we are the ones we've been waiting for" President Obama whom, during the recent news conference, had this to say about the Republicans he had been negotiating with:
It's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed...The hostage was the American people.President Obama, how many times are you going to continue to sully the Office of the Presidency with your unprofessional, uncivil behavior? Obviously you don't remember the words of Thumper from Bambi: "If you can't say something nice, don't say [anything] at all." Or, to quote Dale Carnegie, this is not how to win friends and influence other people.
I'm not someone whom qualifies for the top tax brackets, but let's remember that the 4.6 point bump in the tax rate from 35% to 39.6% doesn't even pay for unemployment compensation, but keep in mind that the $70B arithmetic effect of the tax increase (which is actually attenuated by the economic effects, i.e., tax increases tend to have a negative effect on GDP) is pennies on a dollar of government expenditures. The well-to-do also may state, county, and/or local taxes which can push rates near 60% per income dollar. So, for decisions at the margin, a well-to-do person is working more for the government than for his own benefit. If you look at the chart below (as of 2007), you can see almost immediately after passage of the 2001/2003 tax cuts, the relative proportion paid by the top 1% relative to the bottom 95% quickly surpassed that under the Clinton tax hikes during the Nasdaq stock bubble and in fact crossed over. Under what concept of fairness does it make sense to say that we should raise taxes on a group already paying more than the others all put together (whom get to keep their tax cuts)?
The Democrats are simply furious about the fact that 42 GOP senators can filibuster a Class Warfare Tax Cut Bill versus have it rammed down the nation's throat as if last month's election never happened and actually have to compromise--something which has been missing in our government since the beginning of 2009. What has Obama done of a nature comparable to Bush's bipartisan efforts (e.g., No Child Left Behind). George W. Bush, after winning a close Presidential election that many believe was "stolen" from Al Gore, had a 50-50 Senate, i.e., more than 40 Democratic Senators able to filibuster. Bush couldn't do what he wanted to do; he couldn't push his social security reform proposal (one of 3 options recommended by a commission) through a GOP-controlled Congress. I don't recall in any of these circumstances where Bush likened negotiating with Democrats as dealing with extortionists or kidnappers.
I've really come to expect boorish behavior from partisan Democrats, and I think that most of the Congressional Republicans just let this stuff roll off their back. But let me tell you, President Obama, I don't think treating people disrespectfully that you need to negotiate with escapes the notice of the American people.
 |
| Courtesy of the Tax Foundation |
Political Humor
WikiLeaks has revealed that China tried to censor the Internet. That’s not the China I know. - David Letterman
[The Chinese are responding, "What is WikiLeaks?"...
The Russians are somewhat more frank about their dealings with spies like Julian Assange. There's no truth to the rumor in reference to Mr. Assange's Swedish sex-related arrest warrant, that Vladimir Putin wrote in one of his marker cables, "Mr. Assange: Consider how we respond to kidnappings, and imagine how we deal with spies..." Attached was this news note: "[There was an] incident in Lebanon in September 1985 [involving the] kidnapping of a Soviet diplomat by the Hizbollah organization...The KGB responded by kidnapping a relative of a high ranking Hizballah official, killed him, cut his testicles off, stuffed his testicles into his mouth, and sent his body home to his relatives."]
"President Obama went to Afghanistan over the weekend. He dropped in, shook a few hands, and left within an hour. It’s like me at Thanksgiving." - David Letterman
[Obama was using practical advice from the book "Commander-in-Chief Made Easy". The authors suggest to draw from one's own experience and comfort zone. So Obama treated the appearance like a campaign rally...]
Musical Interlude: Holiday Tunes
Harry Simeone Chorale, "The Little Drummer Boy". If there is one Christmas song that has been perhaps the most widely released in the rock era, it's this song, with prominent covers by Bing Crosby/David Bowie, Bob Seger, Josh Groban, and others. But this is the version I remember from my own childhood and stands on its own merits.
