Elizabeth Harrington of Washington Free Beacon gets an award for the creepiest federal government story of the week.
It has shades of 1984, George Orwell's masterpiece about a totalitarian society. Three ministries control the government under the watchful eye of Big Brother. One of these is the Ministry of Truth. This outfit tirelessly works to create the government's narrative while ruthlessly annihilating dissenting voices, or even history. "We have always been at war with East Asia."
The Obama Administration gave a $1 million grant to a group led by an Organizing For America (Obama's old campaign organization that still exists for some reason) member. The group is creating a program designed to spot "misinformation" and "suspicious memes" in campaigns and public discourse.
They call it "truthy" after a Stephen Colbert bit. Referencing a comedian with a liberal agenda is hardly a good starting point.
Why is this problematic?
The New York Times recently called Obama and his minions the worst threat to press freedom in a generation. No president has worked so hard to control the narrative about his policies, using spying, coercion, and any other tactic possible. Few can compete with Obama and his team in the creating of "misinformation" and "suspicious memes."
Journalism school teaches about the marketplace of ideas. The public can decide which are beneficial and which are not. Certainly the federal government, as a player in that marketplace, cannot be trusted to referee.
Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Friday, July 11, 2014
Twenty-Five Years Ago Today: The Most Dangerous Game Day Promotion Ever
Hard to believe when Americans currently live in a time when companies weigh legal ramifications of every move, but 25 years ago tomorrow a professional sports franchise had a promotion involving dynamite, illegal drugs, and potentially deadly flying discs.
Welcome to the 1970s. Welcome to "Disco Demolition Night."
Between two games of a twi night double header, the Chicago White Sox declared the end to disco by blowing up thousands of records on the field at Old Comisky Park.
Few could recount this as well as the New York Times Joe Lapointe in 2009.
It was disastrous, possibly deadly, completely irresponsible, but memorable enough to bring a smile a quarter century later.
And it reminds you that fun is almost dead.
Welcome to the 1970s. Welcome to "Disco Demolition Night."
Between two games of a twi night double header, the Chicago White Sox declared the end to disco by blowing up thousands of records on the field at Old Comisky Park.
Few could recount this as well as the New York Times Joe Lapointe in 2009.
It was disastrous, possibly deadly, completely irresponsible, but memorable enough to bring a smile a quarter century later.
And it reminds you that fun is almost dead.
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Senate Democrats and Municipalities Line Up to Ban Water Vapor
Water vapor, basically. Several Senate Democrats and a number of local governments across the country want to ban a device that exposes people to nothing more than water vapor.
The device is an e cigarette. It delivers nicotine into the user in the same way as a cigarette, but instead of carcinogen filled smoke, it uses water vapor. Makers of the devices claim that they can help smokers cease using tobacco.
A number of Democratic senators called them, however, "candy coated poisons," and claimed they hurt "the children." They called for extensive regulations that, makers say, might choke out their ability to even sell the product.
CBS News reported on a study that concluded that e cigarettes did not help smokers to stop using tobacco, It also quoted an American Cancer Society official as claiming the study "has limitations" and "problems."
No study, however, has shown that e cigarettes damage a body anymore than drinks that contain the highly addictive drug caffeine. And also come in sweet flavors enticing to children.
New York Times writers from last year called on regulators to "tolerate" e cigarettes. Health officials in New York City fretted that those smoking e cigarettes could brazenly light up in areas that banned smoking. This runs the risk of exposing the public to visible water vapor. Officials also argued that the device represented a "gateway" to actual smoking of actual tobacco.
With nothing better to do, Democrats and bureaucrats scurry to save the general public from the scourge of water vapor.
Update: Philadelphia City Council actually does ban water vapor.
The device is an e cigarette. It delivers nicotine into the user in the same way as a cigarette, but instead of carcinogen filled smoke, it uses water vapor. Makers of the devices claim that they can help smokers cease using tobacco.
A number of Democratic senators called them, however, "candy coated poisons," and claimed they hurt "the children." They called for extensive regulations that, makers say, might choke out their ability to even sell the product.
CBS News reported on a study that concluded that e cigarettes did not help smokers to stop using tobacco, It also quoted an American Cancer Society official as claiming the study "has limitations" and "problems."
No study, however, has shown that e cigarettes damage a body anymore than drinks that contain the highly addictive drug caffeine. And also come in sweet flavors enticing to children.
New York Times writers from last year called on regulators to "tolerate" e cigarettes. Health officials in New York City fretted that those smoking e cigarettes could brazenly light up in areas that banned smoking. This runs the risk of exposing the public to visible water vapor. Officials also argued that the device represented a "gateway" to actual smoking of actual tobacco.
With nothing better to do, Democrats and bureaucrats scurry to save the general public from the scourge of water vapor.
Update: Philadelphia City Council actually does ban water vapor.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
This Week In Things That Dare Not Speak Their Names
It is probably beyond reasonable expectation to think that educated people in the 21st Century are even dimly aware of the culture they supposedly inherit.
But they should not wantonly toss around allusions when they have no concept of the origin.
Two examples in the last several days have popped up where the unknown origin of an allusion has rendered a main topic either confusing or silly.
Both refer to the a 19th century poetic line about "the love that dare not speak its name."
First example comes from the New York Times, bearing the title "The Fear That Dare Not Speak Its Name." The author, Lisa Schwarzbaum, starts by describing a Woody Allen product about a woman who went from being married and rich to becoming single and so destitute that she ends up on the streets.
The author discusses how it left her fearful of the same fate and with affected smartness exclaims "There but for the grace of a Chanel jacket go I."
She goes on to hazily describe feminism, marrying men, wanting to be independent yet taken care of. Typical New York Times pseudo social commentary.
Second example comes by way of the Daily Caller. The writer of the story is not the culprit here. She describes the talk of a Cold War policy maker who argues for resurrecting the old doctrine of "containment" against Iran.
He calls containment the "strategy that dare not speak its name."
And now why these allusions are so bizarre.
In the 1890s, Britain's most talked about trial was the libel suit of Oscar Wilde against the Marquess of Queensberry. Wilde had apparently grown smitten with a younger fellow poet, Lord Alfred Douglas. Wilde and Douglas excited gossip as they became friends, traveled together, and seemed pretty much inseparable. Lost letters from Wilde to Douglas fell into the hands of a blackmailer.
Rumors around the pair also reached Douglas' father, the aforementioned Marquess of Queensberry, better known for formulating rules of amateur boxing.
The libel suit against Queensberry broke down so completely that evidence given to prove his innocence also seemed to damn Wilde as a violator of the "gross indecency" statute that outlawed homosexuality. During one of Wilde's criminal trials, the prosecutor quoted from a poem by Lord Douglas.
Tell me why, sad and sighing, thou dost rove
These pleasent realms? I pray thee speak me sooth
What is thy name?' He said, 'My name is Love.'
Then straight the first did turn himself to me
And cried, 'He lieth, for his name is Shame,
But I am Love, and I was wont to be
Alone in this fair garden, till he came
Unasked by night; I am true Love, I fill
The hearts of boy and girl with mutual flame.'
Then sighing, said the other, 'Have thy will,
I am the love that dare not speak its name.'
The prosecutor seized upon the last line, asking Wilde to explain it. Despite his classically referenced answer, ever since the trial, the phrase has been used to refer to homosexual relations.
So therein lies the reason why the first example is so off base and the second is downright bizarre. Making allusions to well stated quotations from the past can liven up prose or speech. But those who use them without understanding their origin risk looking silly.
But they should not wantonly toss around allusions when they have no concept of the origin.
Two examples in the last several days have popped up where the unknown origin of an allusion has rendered a main topic either confusing or silly.
Both refer to the a 19th century poetic line about "the love that dare not speak its name."
First example comes from the New York Times, bearing the title "The Fear That Dare Not Speak Its Name." The author, Lisa Schwarzbaum, starts by describing a Woody Allen product about a woman who went from being married and rich to becoming single and so destitute that she ends up on the streets.
The author discusses how it left her fearful of the same fate and with affected smartness exclaims "There but for the grace of a Chanel jacket go I."
She goes on to hazily describe feminism, marrying men, wanting to be independent yet taken care of. Typical New York Times pseudo social commentary.
Second example comes by way of the Daily Caller. The writer of the story is not the culprit here. She describes the talk of a Cold War policy maker who argues for resurrecting the old doctrine of "containment" against Iran.
He calls containment the "strategy that dare not speak its name."
And now why these allusions are so bizarre.
In the 1890s, Britain's most talked about trial was the libel suit of Oscar Wilde against the Marquess of Queensberry. Wilde had apparently grown smitten with a younger fellow poet, Lord Alfred Douglas. Wilde and Douglas excited gossip as they became friends, traveled together, and seemed pretty much inseparable. Lost letters from Wilde to Douglas fell into the hands of a blackmailer.
Rumors around the pair also reached Douglas' father, the aforementioned Marquess of Queensberry, better known for formulating rules of amateur boxing.
The libel suit against Queensberry broke down so completely that evidence given to prove his innocence also seemed to damn Wilde as a violator of the "gross indecency" statute that outlawed homosexuality. During one of Wilde's criminal trials, the prosecutor quoted from a poem by Lord Douglas.
Tell me why, sad and sighing, thou dost rove
These pleasent realms? I pray thee speak me sooth
What is thy name?' He said, 'My name is Love.'
Then straight the first did turn himself to me
And cried, 'He lieth, for his name is Shame,
But I am Love, and I was wont to be
Alone in this fair garden, till he came
Unasked by night; I am true Love, I fill
The hearts of boy and girl with mutual flame.'
Then sighing, said the other, 'Have thy will,
I am the love that dare not speak its name.'
The prosecutor seized upon the last line, asking Wilde to explain it. Despite his classically referenced answer, ever since the trial, the phrase has been used to refer to homosexual relations.
So therein lies the reason why the first example is so off base and the second is downright bizarre. Making allusions to well stated quotations from the past can liven up prose or speech. But those who use them without understanding their origin risk looking silly.
Friday, September 13, 2013
Another Old Media Legend Apparently Gets Burned: The Current Tribulations of Sports Illustrated
It happened to the New Republic. It even happened to the New York Times. Reporters high on ambition, but low on effort, or perhaps talent, tried to cheat to get ahead.
And now it may have happened to the "grey lady" of sports journalism.
Sports Illustrated spent 10 months nurturing an investigation into Oklahoma State's football program led by former Fox Sports analyst Thayer Evans. He claimed to have found serious NCAA violations, including academic fraud, player payouts, even sex for recruits. Seemingly the school over several years delved into every shady practice tried in the Southeastern Conference with a few wrinkles used at Colorado for good measure.
In essence, this could dwarf almost every scandal except for Southern Methodist University's legendary offenses in the 1980s.
Most of the time such a story must start with willing and committed sources. They must be named and be counted on to face whatever backlash may come. Some sources are trustworthy, others may have their own grudges against the school. Those with grudges, like prisoners testifying for the prosecution, must be backed by evidence that confirms their stories.
The five part series rolled out by Sports Illustrated unraveled almost from the start because the main pillars of their story turned out to be the interviewed sources. Even the writer's veracity came under fire.
Jason Whitlock, a former colleague of Evans, blasted the writer himself. He called Evans "simpleminded" and said that such a "huge, gigantic Oklahoma homer" could not possibly set aside collegiate rivalry angst to report objectively. Whitlock claimed that although he had no personal animus against Evans, that "It wouldn't shock me if Thayer Evans couldn't spell the word 'cat'."
Former Oklahoma State quarterback Brandon Weeden, now with the Cleveland Browns, commented as well to local Ohio media. Far from being worried for his alma mater, he called the story "comical" and said that he "laughed through the whole thing." More importantly, Weeden questioned the credibility of every source, noting that some had been kicked off the team for drugs or other infractions.
Furthermore, most of the named sources backed away from the story and its writers.
Factcheckers looking at the details of the story noted inconsistencies. Sports Illustrated claimed that one of the sources, former safety Fath Carter, held two degrees from Oklahoma State. A check with the university registrar's office finds that he did not even earn one.
If the allegations against the writers are true, it remains to be determined whether the reporting resulted from extremely bad methods or intentional "cooking." Either way, the fallout has spread beyond the story. West Virginia University initiated an immediate in-house investigation of assistant coach Joe DeForrest after it found that the story named him.
The new age of journalism creates more opportunities than in the past. It also spurs more competition. To become a pundit, get on television, spout opinions, and make big money, reporters have to get noticed. Some get noticed because they are attractive and speak well, others because of personality or athletic experience. Of course breaking the big story does not hurt.
Increased competition can make journalists better, but also tempt some onto the easy path from the ethical straight and narrow.
Sports journalism, however, has more than its share of sloppiness, attention seeking, and bad reporting. ESPN's Skip Bayless on the morning program First Take stopped a hairs breadth short of defamation when he insinuated that New York Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter recovered quickly from injury by using banned substances. He had also once floated the opinion that former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Troy Aikman was gay.
Many media outlets also noted that network's overly obsessive coverage of nomadic backup quarterback Tim Tebow at the expense of actual sports news coverage.
Sloppy reporting can cost players in many ways. Nolan Nawrocki's predraft evaluation of current New York Jets quarterback Geno Smith was called racist in some circles, merely "gutless" in others. Nawrocki relied solely on unnamed sources to present Smith as unmotivated and lazy on the eve of the draft. He related that Smith was texting on his phone while coaches tried to give him direction, when it was more likely that Smith took notes on an electronic device. West Virginia University sources in particular went on the record to describe in detail Smith's obsession with film study and position education.
That report may have cost Smith draft position. A far enough drop could have meant the difference in millions of dollars.
Bad reporting pops up all of the time in other fields. Campaign coverage of Mitt Romney routinely focused on the surface, rarely sought to tell a story in depth. Buzzfeed offered a mea culpa of sorts with its recent story "Was Mitt Romney Right About Everything?" But the reporters on the campaign did not make up facts so much as they overemphasized some and ignored others.
Sports reporting has a few major problems. First, many report and speculate as if inaccuracy or wild accusation has no real consequences. They fool themselves into thinking that it's just a game after all. But they must report on individual lives and reputations, as well as business and administration, the same as if they covered politics, diplomacy, or the economy. The same restraints and rules must apply to reporters all the way up to the editors. Stakes are high, regardless of the fact that a game lies at the center of many stories.
Sports Illustrated and other outlets, in other words, must take reporting and the effects of it with the same seriousness as the Wall Street Journal.
Many reporters get into sportswriting for the love of the game. They want to cover the Super Bowl, tell the stories of athletes, and write about teams. The rise of the sporting industrial complex over the past generation has thrown new worlds into the genre. Sports news outlets need to aggressively court and hire reporters who specialize in finance, political administration and economics. Since the worst of the hacks attempt armchair sociology, they may need to dip into that field as well.
Sports media outlets have done a great job moving forward with technology. But they have not taken seriously the expansion of their purview. Those who got in to write about the big game along with the ex-jocks and coaches can only cover the material so well.
To regain credibility, the entire field of sports media must rise to meet the same standards as the best examples of other media. Also, like the New Republic and New York Times, they must disavow the poisoned reporting fruit that will inevitably grow from their branches.
And now it may have happened to the "grey lady" of sports journalism.
Sports Illustrated spent 10 months nurturing an investigation into Oklahoma State's football program led by former Fox Sports analyst Thayer Evans. He claimed to have found serious NCAA violations, including academic fraud, player payouts, even sex for recruits. Seemingly the school over several years delved into every shady practice tried in the Southeastern Conference with a few wrinkles used at Colorado for good measure.
In essence, this could dwarf almost every scandal except for Southern Methodist University's legendary offenses in the 1980s.
Most of the time such a story must start with willing and committed sources. They must be named and be counted on to face whatever backlash may come. Some sources are trustworthy, others may have their own grudges against the school. Those with grudges, like prisoners testifying for the prosecution, must be backed by evidence that confirms their stories.
The five part series rolled out by Sports Illustrated unraveled almost from the start because the main pillars of their story turned out to be the interviewed sources. Even the writer's veracity came under fire.
Jason Whitlock, a former colleague of Evans, blasted the writer himself. He called Evans "simpleminded" and said that such a "huge, gigantic Oklahoma homer" could not possibly set aside collegiate rivalry angst to report objectively. Whitlock claimed that although he had no personal animus against Evans, that "It wouldn't shock me if Thayer Evans couldn't spell the word 'cat'."
Former Oklahoma State quarterback Brandon Weeden, now with the Cleveland Browns, commented as well to local Ohio media. Far from being worried for his alma mater, he called the story "comical" and said that he "laughed through the whole thing." More importantly, Weeden questioned the credibility of every source, noting that some had been kicked off the team for drugs or other infractions.
Furthermore, most of the named sources backed away from the story and its writers.
Factcheckers looking at the details of the story noted inconsistencies. Sports Illustrated claimed that one of the sources, former safety Fath Carter, held two degrees from Oklahoma State. A check with the university registrar's office finds that he did not even earn one.
If the allegations against the writers are true, it remains to be determined whether the reporting resulted from extremely bad methods or intentional "cooking." Either way, the fallout has spread beyond the story. West Virginia University initiated an immediate in-house investigation of assistant coach Joe DeForrest after it found that the story named him.
The new age of journalism creates more opportunities than in the past. It also spurs more competition. To become a pundit, get on television, spout opinions, and make big money, reporters have to get noticed. Some get noticed because they are attractive and speak well, others because of personality or athletic experience. Of course breaking the big story does not hurt.
Increased competition can make journalists better, but also tempt some onto the easy path from the ethical straight and narrow.
Sports journalism, however, has more than its share of sloppiness, attention seeking, and bad reporting. ESPN's Skip Bayless on the morning program First Take stopped a hairs breadth short of defamation when he insinuated that New York Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter recovered quickly from injury by using banned substances. He had also once floated the opinion that former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Troy Aikman was gay.
Many media outlets also noted that network's overly obsessive coverage of nomadic backup quarterback Tim Tebow at the expense of actual sports news coverage.
Sloppy reporting can cost players in many ways. Nolan Nawrocki's predraft evaluation of current New York Jets quarterback Geno Smith was called racist in some circles, merely "gutless" in others. Nawrocki relied solely on unnamed sources to present Smith as unmotivated and lazy on the eve of the draft. He related that Smith was texting on his phone while coaches tried to give him direction, when it was more likely that Smith took notes on an electronic device. West Virginia University sources in particular went on the record to describe in detail Smith's obsession with film study and position education.
That report may have cost Smith draft position. A far enough drop could have meant the difference in millions of dollars.
Bad reporting pops up all of the time in other fields. Campaign coverage of Mitt Romney routinely focused on the surface, rarely sought to tell a story in depth. Buzzfeed offered a mea culpa of sorts with its recent story "Was Mitt Romney Right About Everything?" But the reporters on the campaign did not make up facts so much as they overemphasized some and ignored others.
Sports reporting has a few major problems. First, many report and speculate as if inaccuracy or wild accusation has no real consequences. They fool themselves into thinking that it's just a game after all. But they must report on individual lives and reputations, as well as business and administration, the same as if they covered politics, diplomacy, or the economy. The same restraints and rules must apply to reporters all the way up to the editors. Stakes are high, regardless of the fact that a game lies at the center of many stories.
Sports Illustrated and other outlets, in other words, must take reporting and the effects of it with the same seriousness as the Wall Street Journal.
Many reporters get into sportswriting for the love of the game. They want to cover the Super Bowl, tell the stories of athletes, and write about teams. The rise of the sporting industrial complex over the past generation has thrown new worlds into the genre. Sports news outlets need to aggressively court and hire reporters who specialize in finance, political administration and economics. Since the worst of the hacks attempt armchair sociology, they may need to dip into that field as well.
Sports media outlets have done a great job moving forward with technology. But they have not taken seriously the expansion of their purview. Those who got in to write about the big game along with the ex-jocks and coaches can only cover the material so well.
To regain credibility, the entire field of sports media must rise to meet the same standards as the best examples of other media. Also, like the New Republic and New York Times, they must disavow the poisoned reporting fruit that will inevitably grow from their branches.
Monday, July 1, 2013
The Dangers of Meddling in Syria
Last month, experts testified to a House committee that inaction in Syria emboldened Iran. Not long after that, Senator John McCain predicted that "the entire Middle East is up for grabs, and our enemies are fully committed to winning." He urged Obama to lead.
The New York Times cited an estimate from the opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that over 100,000 have died so far in the four year conflict. As in many such wars, civilians and their property take the brunt of the violence. Both sides seek to terrify the population into supporting its cause. Resources must be destroyed to deny their use to the enemy.
Such is the nature of "civil war." Even in the American Civil War, Union generals used artificial famine as a weapon in Georgia and the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia.
Because of the misery inflicted by this war, many have urged Obama to get directly involved. Some cite humanitarian issues. Others point to Russia's support of the Assad regime, a government which has historically acted out against American and Israeli interests.
Just because there is a "bad guy" does not mean that he is opposed by a "good guy." President Assad is an authoritarian tyrant and supporter of terrorism. But would he be replaced by anything better? Rebel murder of a Syrian Roman Catholic priest tells the Western world otherwise. He was decapitated with an ordinary kitchen knife as fanatics shriekingly chanted "God is great!"
Do we really want that to run a Middle Eastern nation state?
Syria occupies a keystone position in the Eastern Mediterranean. North is Turkey, grumbling against a somewhat Islamacist government. Nearby lies Egypt, seemingly ripe for a military coup. Bordering Syria is Lebanon, who suffered a horrific civil war of its own in the 1980s. Spillover from the war could be destructive. A jihadist regime replacing Assad could be even worse.
The correct U. S. response should be a pox on both your houses. Do not get sucked into a race with the Russians over arming sides. Leadership should take the part of cooperative quarantining of the war within the bounds of Syria.
Yes this is a particularly horrible war. But there is nothing that the United States can directly do that will not make it worse on Syrians and threaten the degenerating stability of the region.
The New York Times cited an estimate from the opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that over 100,000 have died so far in the four year conflict. As in many such wars, civilians and their property take the brunt of the violence. Both sides seek to terrify the population into supporting its cause. Resources must be destroyed to deny their use to the enemy.
Such is the nature of "civil war." Even in the American Civil War, Union generals used artificial famine as a weapon in Georgia and the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia.
Because of the misery inflicted by this war, many have urged Obama to get directly involved. Some cite humanitarian issues. Others point to Russia's support of the Assad regime, a government which has historically acted out against American and Israeli interests.
Just because there is a "bad guy" does not mean that he is opposed by a "good guy." President Assad is an authoritarian tyrant and supporter of terrorism. But would he be replaced by anything better? Rebel murder of a Syrian Roman Catholic priest tells the Western world otherwise. He was decapitated with an ordinary kitchen knife as fanatics shriekingly chanted "God is great!"
Do we really want that to run a Middle Eastern nation state?
Syria occupies a keystone position in the Eastern Mediterranean. North is Turkey, grumbling against a somewhat Islamacist government. Nearby lies Egypt, seemingly ripe for a military coup. Bordering Syria is Lebanon, who suffered a horrific civil war of its own in the 1980s. Spillover from the war could be destructive. A jihadist regime replacing Assad could be even worse.
The correct U. S. response should be a pox on both your houses. Do not get sucked into a race with the Russians over arming sides. Leadership should take the part of cooperative quarantining of the war within the bounds of Syria.
Yes this is a particularly horrible war. But there is nothing that the United States can directly do that will not make it worse on Syrians and threaten the degenerating stability of the region.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Hither and Yon
Ever since it was declared that Mineral County should cease development or risk running out of water, God has seen fit to drench the region with rain and snow almost every single day .
*********************************************************************
The Grant County Press reported lottery payouts to local governments.Hampshire, $2,803.63; Hardy, $1,698.89; Mineral, $11,039.98; Pendleton, $157.51; Tucker, $153.15.
Petersburg received a payment of $176.37 and Bayard picked up $21.76.
Some other cities and their payments were: Franklin, $16.97; Keyser, $3,109.46; Moorefield, $401.56; Romney, $301.12: Wardensville, $41.59; and Elk Garden, $127.24.
Petersburg received a payment of $176.37 and Bayard picked up $21.76.
Some other cities and their payments were: Franklin, $16.97; Keyser, $3,109.46; Moorefield, $401.56; Romney, $301.12: Wardensville, $41.59; and Elk Garden, $127.24.
From the new table games account, Grant, Hardy, Hampshire, and Pendleton each received $242.65. Cities received $57.67.
**********************************************************************
Antiwar protesters love using quotations. Ever notice that? They love to drag some quote out of context to try and prove that Founding Fathers or other respectable people share their viewpoints. The Devil can even cite Scripture for his own purposes. People's actions reflect their nature better than their words. Yes John Adams discussed the evil of war, but he built up a United States Navy and sent it to war, as did his successor Thomas Jefferson.Quotations are easy to memorize and antiwar folks are very good at learning their lines. However, true wisdom lies in knowledge AND understanding. Ron Paul on his website utterly distorts the meaning of Washington's Farewell Address. Knowing the text helps one to under stand that Washington meant only Europe. Understanding the man could lead one to believe that Washington's nature was far from dogmatic. He changed his approaches to problems in life, war, and politics readily. When someone uses a quote alone to argue a point, it may serve as a red flag that he or she has chosen the easy way out and does not truly understand.
*********************************************************************
*********************************************************************
Sean Penn has visited the dictators of Iran and Venezuela. All three agree that Dennis Kucinich is the right president for the United States. With those kinds of endorsements, who could lose*********************************************************************
All baseball players found to have used steroids need their statistics and awards expunged from the record books. It would be nice to see the fans get their money back from these cheaters.
************************************************************************* The New York Times has a long history of looking the other way in the face of leftist terror. Seventy five years ago last month, their correspondent Walter Duranty reported at the height of the Stalin imposed famine, "there is no actual starvation or deaths from starvation." Reports of hundreds of thousands, even millions of deaths he called "Malignant propaganda." In Ukraine alone perhaps five million died during this crisis imposed by Stalin's desire to communize farming.
At the New York Times, bending over backwards to accommodate dictators has been tradition.
************************************************************************
Don't forget about the Harrison County Republican Club Dinner on Friday December 21. Tommy Phillips and the Harrison County Club have done an outstanding job putting together a Christmas dinner. The food will be terrific, the speakers and good times even better.
2007 Harrison County Republican Club Christmas DinnerDecember 21, 2007
Social - 5:30 P.M. -
Dinner 6:00 P.M.Cottage Corner Restaraunt in SalemGuest Speaker -
St. Senator Clark Barnes (R-Randolph)Auctioneer - Rocky PeckTickets - $20.00 per person
Please contact - HCRC President Tommy Phillips - (304)672-6890
Email - gopguy1980@verizon.net
HCRC Vice President Jack Pringle - (304)669-3781
Also in attendance will be Republican candidate for the 14th Senatorial District Gary Howell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)