On Monday, Salon compared Republican resistance to the Civil War. It called the GOP rebels without noting that it currently fights, as it did then, for liberty.
We can make historical comparisons, too.
Obama's entire administration has resembled the worst examples of the old coal company town in Southern West Virginia. How so?
In company towns, all aspects of life were provided for by or otherwise controlled by company authorities.
The company hired the teachers and controlled curriculum in the schools. Obama's Department of Education seeks more and more control, removing local government and parents from the equation.
The company provided the health care that it thought you deserved. Like Obamacare.
Many company towns actively monitored and suppressed dissent. They especially feared organized labor. Obama's NSA, IRS, DHS, and other agencies collect information on and/or harass groups whose influence it fears.
Reporters coming into coal towns to find the truth were routinely threatened and beaten. Obama's administration has secretly monitored the Associated Press and who knows who else.
Rising tuition costs and easy credit have trapped college graduates into a cycle of debt control. They do not make enough money to pay their debts. Just like the set up in the old company town stores.
In one infamous incident, striking miners living in houses on company land near Matewan were evicted by mine guards from the Baldwin and Felts Detective Agency. This violated local law that said any evictions must go through the courts and be carried out by the sheriff. Obama's administration evicted elderly families from homes they had lived in since the 1970s because they were on federal land.
The company towns were a bad development because they placed all power over a community in the hands of one central authority. Even if it had good intentions, absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is a good thing that Congress has stood up for its role in our system of government. Obama has been corrupted enough already.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
A Casualty of the Big Government Nanny State Remembered
The Calamity Cafe has returned, if only on Facebook.
Most in the Potomac Highlands would have no reason to have heard of it. But the Calamity Cafe for a decade was a Huntington icon. It sat on the corner of Hal Greer Boulevard and 3rd Avenue, right across from Marshall University's Old Main.
Mostly college faculty and students packed it for lunch, dinner, and live music on weekends. It featured a southwestern, hippified atmosphere with Indian blankets and cow skulls as decor. The food was incomparable. Recipes were created on site, using farm fresh ingredients well before that was all the rage.
Like I said before, this place was pretty hippified. And that made it a fun place to go at any time.
The Calamity did an amazing business. It served as a center of college life and was never empty. Yet it has not been there for almost 10 years. Why? Big government, of course.
Two rooms separated by a narrow hallway formed the restaurant. One side served non smoking customers, the other had the small stage and catered to smokers. Cabell County in the late 1990s wanted to join the anti-smoking regulation fad and required restaurants to have a physical barrier between the smoking and non smoking sections. This was meant for places that allowed smoking at the bar and not elsewhere in an open floor plan. But it was applied to the Calamity as well.
Chains like Outback and Applebees complied easily, constructing expensive barriers. The Calamity could not afford to reconfigure its restaurant so it closed. Chains picked up the business.
That is why small businesses close. Unnecessary and stupidly written regulations.
Now the Calamity Cafe only exists in memory. It was a small restaurant, but there were those who loved it. And Big Government crushed it.
Most in the Potomac Highlands would have no reason to have heard of it. But the Calamity Cafe for a decade was a Huntington icon. It sat on the corner of Hal Greer Boulevard and 3rd Avenue, right across from Marshall University's Old Main.
Mostly college faculty and students packed it for lunch, dinner, and live music on weekends. It featured a southwestern, hippified atmosphere with Indian blankets and cow skulls as decor. The food was incomparable. Recipes were created on site, using farm fresh ingredients well before that was all the rage.
Like I said before, this place was pretty hippified. And that made it a fun place to go at any time.
The Calamity did an amazing business. It served as a center of college life and was never empty. Yet it has not been there for almost 10 years. Why? Big government, of course.
Two rooms separated by a narrow hallway formed the restaurant. One side served non smoking customers, the other had the small stage and catered to smokers. Cabell County in the late 1990s wanted to join the anti-smoking regulation fad and required restaurants to have a physical barrier between the smoking and non smoking sections. This was meant for places that allowed smoking at the bar and not elsewhere in an open floor plan. But it was applied to the Calamity as well.
Chains like Outback and Applebees complied easily, constructing expensive barriers. The Calamity could not afford to reconfigure its restaurant so it closed. Chains picked up the business.
That is why small businesses close. Unnecessary and stupidly written regulations.
Now the Calamity Cafe only exists in memory. It was a small restaurant, but there were those who loved it. And Big Government crushed it.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Naturally Changing the World Balance of Power
America's "gas revolution," combined with stepped up domestic oil production could undermine a US foreign rival.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia relied heavily on its natural gas production to rebuild its economy. By the ascension of Vladimir Putin to the presidency, Russian dominance in gas production helped to steady its economy while Europe, Japan, and the United States experienced uncertainty.
Gas revenues helped Russia to rebuild its state and military over the past decade, but the country's inability to diversify its economy could lead to disaster.
Europe for decades relied heavily on gas exports from first the USSR, then Russia, to help satisfy its energy needs. Now, as Washington Free Beacon reports, a sudden upwelling of gas exports from the United States has forced prices to drop worldwide. Russia feels the pinch as their gas revenues decline.
The IMf, according to the story, revised down its estimates for Russian economic growth in 2014. Though three percent still qualifies as fairly robust, it pales in comparison to the expected seven.
All this comes as the federal government considers dropping many of the remaining gas export restrictions. This could help to open the markets in South Central Asia as well as Europe, hurting Iranian exports as well as Russia.
A hundred years ago, President William Howard Taft pioneered "dollar diplomacy." He tried to use US economic power instead of force in pushing other states to act more in line with American interests. The US has been stung many times by energy diplomacy from Russia and the Middle East. Increasing output, raising exports, and becoming self-sufficient is the right call for US jobs and national security
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia relied heavily on its natural gas production to rebuild its economy. By the ascension of Vladimir Putin to the presidency, Russian dominance in gas production helped to steady its economy while Europe, Japan, and the United States experienced uncertainty.
Gas revenues helped Russia to rebuild its state and military over the past decade, but the country's inability to diversify its economy could lead to disaster.
Europe for decades relied heavily on gas exports from first the USSR, then Russia, to help satisfy its energy needs. Now, as Washington Free Beacon reports, a sudden upwelling of gas exports from the United States has forced prices to drop worldwide. Russia feels the pinch as their gas revenues decline.
The IMf, according to the story, revised down its estimates for Russian economic growth in 2014. Though three percent still qualifies as fairly robust, it pales in comparison to the expected seven.
All this comes as the federal government considers dropping many of the remaining gas export restrictions. This could help to open the markets in South Central Asia as well as Europe, hurting Iranian exports as well as Russia.
A hundred years ago, President William Howard Taft pioneered "dollar diplomacy." He tried to use US economic power instead of force in pushing other states to act more in line with American interests. The US has been stung many times by energy diplomacy from Russia and the Middle East. Increasing output, raising exports, and becoming self-sufficient is the right call for US jobs and national security
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Hydra-Headed Obamacare Threat Spelled Out In State Journal Piece
The State Journal released a moderate sized article packed with Obamacare spawned problems.
It quotes David Ransey, CEO of Charleston Area Medical Center extensively. Ramsey is frankly fearful of Obamacare's impact.
First. he details the threat to state hospitals. Hospitals already face financial pressures. In West Virginia, 18 have closed in the past 40 years. The uncertain climate introduced by Obamacare threatens many of the rest.
Ramsey slammed public health care programs, both those for low income individuals and public employees. They pay late and do not cover the full cost of services. Hospitals must shift almost a third of a billion dollars per year onto private insurance to make up the shortfall.
Under Obamacare, this will only get worse. Since many doctors will refuse to take Obamacare, this shifts more burden onto emergency rooms. Costs rise for everyone.
The end of the piece adds in an interesting nugget. Mark Muchow, from the state Department of Revenue, claims that Obamacare's increased cost burden on state taxpayers will require cuts in the budget somewhere. He speculated these would come from higher education.
Obamacare is a nightmare for states, taxpayers, health care providers, private insurance, and, eventually state colleges and universities.
Good thing we didn't read it first.
It quotes David Ransey, CEO of Charleston Area Medical Center extensively. Ramsey is frankly fearful of Obamacare's impact.
First. he details the threat to state hospitals. Hospitals already face financial pressures. In West Virginia, 18 have closed in the past 40 years. The uncertain climate introduced by Obamacare threatens many of the rest.
Ramsey slammed public health care programs, both those for low income individuals and public employees. They pay late and do not cover the full cost of services. Hospitals must shift almost a third of a billion dollars per year onto private insurance to make up the shortfall.
Under Obamacare, this will only get worse. Since many doctors will refuse to take Obamacare, this shifts more burden onto emergency rooms. Costs rise for everyone.
The end of the piece adds in an interesting nugget. Mark Muchow, from the state Department of Revenue, claims that Obamacare's increased cost burden on state taxpayers will require cuts in the budget somewhere. He speculated these would come from higher education.
Obamacare is a nightmare for states, taxpayers, health care providers, private insurance, and, eventually state colleges and universities.
Good thing we didn't read it first.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
What to Do With the West Virginia School For the Deaf and Blind?
The rumblings have been coming for some time. What will happen to the 143 year old West Virginia School For the Deaf and Blind in Romney?
Assessments over the past year have raised questions. Why keep the school in Romney? How can the state afford to pay to maintain historically significant, but dilapidated and unused buildings? In what ways must the school update itself to meet 21st century guidelines?
Estimates run as high as $80 million to renovate the campus and its curriculum to meet modern guidelines.
The location vexes many. Why did the state put the school there in the first place? The first generation of West Virginia state leaders sprinkled state institutions in different regions. Most state jobs at the time were political appointments, so state institutions were seen as a good way to build party strength. A story, perhaps apocryphal, says that Moundsville could have had West Virginia University, but chose the penitentiary instead because it offered more state jobs.
State law requires that the school remain in Romney. It is unlikely that other legislators will desire to oppose Hampshire County's senators and delegates while also aligning themselves against an inevitable parade of disabled children and their supporters.
If Montgomery was able to prevent the sensible move of the school formerly known as West Virginia Tech to Charleston, the removal of this school from Romney is highly unlikely.
So it will likely stay put. But how should it change and where will the money come from?
Currently the school only uses a fraction of its campus for educational purposes.
So here's a thought. It may not even be doable. But ideas are always worth debating.
First, do what colleges and universities do. Hire a development team to raise money to refurbish the campus. If the state makes a commitment to keep the school there, fundraisers can put donor names on every building. They can even put plaques on every quarter acre.
Second, think beyond now. What else can the school offer with its unused space? Can it offer specialized digital classes to other schools and parents across the country? Can it put together a post graduate training center to educate teachers from all over on how to work with deaf or blind children?
In other words, how can this beautiful and historical space be best utilized to not only serve the children of West Virginia, but also help to advance the field of disabled education?
This can be done under the current regime. It might, however, offer better results if a non profit organization came together as a partner. A non profit could take over currently unused sections of the campus and expand programs while partnering with and enriching the traditional mission.
Such an institution would certainly provide significant economic impact for Romney and Hampshire County. A non profit that can attract out of state funds would perform that function much better than relying solely on taxpayer efforts.
It could be done. It is at least worth a discussion.
Assessments over the past year have raised questions. Why keep the school in Romney? How can the state afford to pay to maintain historically significant, but dilapidated and unused buildings? In what ways must the school update itself to meet 21st century guidelines?
Estimates run as high as $80 million to renovate the campus and its curriculum to meet modern guidelines.
The location vexes many. Why did the state put the school there in the first place? The first generation of West Virginia state leaders sprinkled state institutions in different regions. Most state jobs at the time were political appointments, so state institutions were seen as a good way to build party strength. A story, perhaps apocryphal, says that Moundsville could have had West Virginia University, but chose the penitentiary instead because it offered more state jobs.
State law requires that the school remain in Romney. It is unlikely that other legislators will desire to oppose Hampshire County's senators and delegates while also aligning themselves against an inevitable parade of disabled children and their supporters.
If Montgomery was able to prevent the sensible move of the school formerly known as West Virginia Tech to Charleston, the removal of this school from Romney is highly unlikely.
So it will likely stay put. But how should it change and where will the money come from?
Currently the school only uses a fraction of its campus for educational purposes.
So here's a thought. It may not even be doable. But ideas are always worth debating.
First, do what colleges and universities do. Hire a development team to raise money to refurbish the campus. If the state makes a commitment to keep the school there, fundraisers can put donor names on every building. They can even put plaques on every quarter acre.
Second, think beyond now. What else can the school offer with its unused space? Can it offer specialized digital classes to other schools and parents across the country? Can it put together a post graduate training center to educate teachers from all over on how to work with deaf or blind children?
In other words, how can this beautiful and historical space be best utilized to not only serve the children of West Virginia, but also help to advance the field of disabled education?
This can be done under the current regime. It might, however, offer better results if a non profit organization came together as a partner. A non profit could take over currently unused sections of the campus and expand programs while partnering with and enriching the traditional mission.
Such an institution would certainly provide significant economic impact for Romney and Hampshire County. A non profit that can attract out of state funds would perform that function much better than relying solely on taxpayer efforts.
It could be done. It is at least worth a discussion.
Why Primary Offense Expansion Gives Police Too Much Power
Allegheny Radio Corporation's Amanda Mangan reported on Facebook about new traffic laws in Maryland that could affect West Virginia drivers.
She reported that, as of October 1, using a cell phone while driving now is a primary offense. Like Maryland laws on seat belt usage, this means that officers can pull over drivers if they see them violating the law. A driver can use his or her phone if pulled over, but not in the travel portion of the roadway.
These changes certainly affect West Virginia drivers in the Eastern Panhandle who frequently use Maryland interstates.
But they can also lead to a wider problem because they expand the scope of probable cause. A police officer cannot pull a driver over unless they have good reason to suspect a violation of law. Police need probable cause to satisfy Fourth Amendment requirements that the government not interfere with persons or their effects without good reason.
When states expand the scope of primary offenses, they also unintentionally expand the opportunity for unscrupulous law enforcement officers. All an officer needs to say to justify pulling a car over is to claim that he or she thought they saw the driver using a cell phone.
The CDC reports that 3,331 drivers in 2011 died in accidents where cell phones were a factor. That rose by 70 from the year before. Proponents of expanding primary offense laws claim that they keep people safer from roadway malefactors
But is this worth the inevitable accompaniment of expanding law enforcement's ability to harass citizens at will?
She reported that, as of October 1, using a cell phone while driving now is a primary offense. Like Maryland laws on seat belt usage, this means that officers can pull over drivers if they see them violating the law. A driver can use his or her phone if pulled over, but not in the travel portion of the roadway.
These changes certainly affect West Virginia drivers in the Eastern Panhandle who frequently use Maryland interstates.
But they can also lead to a wider problem because they expand the scope of probable cause. A police officer cannot pull a driver over unless they have good reason to suspect a violation of law. Police need probable cause to satisfy Fourth Amendment requirements that the government not interfere with persons or their effects without good reason.
When states expand the scope of primary offenses, they also unintentionally expand the opportunity for unscrupulous law enforcement officers. All an officer needs to say to justify pulling a car over is to claim that he or she thought they saw the driver using a cell phone.
The CDC reports that 3,331 drivers in 2011 died in accidents where cell phones were a factor. That rose by 70 from the year before. Proponents of expanding primary offense laws claim that they keep people safer from roadway malefactors
But is this worth the inevitable accompaniment of expanding law enforcement's ability to harass citizens at will?
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Is the EPA Afraid of West Virginia?
List of cities where the EPA will hold hearings on carbon dioxide emissions, including from coal power plants.
Notice that none are in West Virginia or any other major coal producing state.
Outrageous.
Cecil Roberts needs to join with the West Virginia Republican Party and demand a hearing in West Virginia.
Notice that none are in West Virginia or any other major coal producing state.
Outrageous.
Cecil Roberts needs to join with the West Virginia Republican Party and demand a hearing in West Virginia.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Good and Bad Proposals From Children's Poverty Symposium
The "Our Children, Our Future" symposium last week brought several ideas to the table that proponents argue could improve the lives of children in poverty.
Dick Wittburg from the Mid-Ohio Valley Health Department in Parkersburg suggested that great strides in childhood dental health could be made with one simple change. He suggested that West Virginia petition the federal government to allow it to exclude sugary soda pop drinks from approved food stamp purchases.
He noted that sugar did not harm teeth as much as concentrated citric acid often found in the beverages.
Others argued that the state needed to raise its minimum wage above that of the federal level. This would obviously have a detrimental impact. Small businesses with thin profit margins would either cut employees or go out of business entirely because they are unable to pay more.
The state could also offer a scaled down version of the federal Earned Income Tax Credit. Families with children earning under certain incomes qualify for more rebates on their income taxes. This program, started under President Ronald Reagan, rewards working families with children. Senator Mike Hall (R-Putnam) noted that such a program would likely cost the state around $37 million per year.
Such symposiums are valuable. Experts can bring ideas to Charleston to be debated by legislators and others. Despite the fact that some of these plans could be seriously detrimental, it is positive that the state provides a venue where they can be debated.
Dick Wittburg from the Mid-Ohio Valley Health Department in Parkersburg suggested that great strides in childhood dental health could be made with one simple change. He suggested that West Virginia petition the federal government to allow it to exclude sugary soda pop drinks from approved food stamp purchases.
He noted that sugar did not harm teeth as much as concentrated citric acid often found in the beverages.
Others argued that the state needed to raise its minimum wage above that of the federal level. This would obviously have a detrimental impact. Small businesses with thin profit margins would either cut employees or go out of business entirely because they are unable to pay more.
The state could also offer a scaled down version of the federal Earned Income Tax Credit. Families with children earning under certain incomes qualify for more rebates on their income taxes. This program, started under President Ronald Reagan, rewards working families with children. Senator Mike Hall (R-Putnam) noted that such a program would likely cost the state around $37 million per year.
Such symposiums are valuable. Experts can bring ideas to Charleston to be debated by legislators and others. Despite the fact that some of these plans could be seriously detrimental, it is positive that the state provides a venue where they can be debated.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Has the Federal Government Inadvertently Set a States' Rights Precedent? Delegates Sobonya and Cowles Think So
Since 1819, McCullough v. Maryland has served as the law of the land. At that time, state governments exercised more power and held more credibility than the still infant federal government. Chief Justice John Marshall and the Supreme Court sought to bolster the federal government's position to prevent disruption from jealous states.
Marshall wrote the opinion broadly enough so that it legally prevented any state from officially acting in contradiction to any federal policy or agency. State police cannot even legally pull over a federal vehicle that is speeding.
Obviously this decision came in the context of its times. The federal government was very small and claimed few powers. Some of the states had existed for almost or over 200 years as political units.
Delegates Kelli Sobonya (R) Cabell, and Darryl Cowles (R) Morgan, think they may see a breach in the iron wall of McCullough.
In a recent Legislative committee meeting on medical marijuana covered by the Charleston Daily Mail , Sobonya queried about the inconsistent enforcement of marijuana laws by the federal government.
If Sobonya and Cowles are right, then the Obama Administration may have opened the door to states ignoring laws that they find onerous to their citizens. EPA regulations and Obamacare were cited by the delegates as examples.
Delegate Gary Howell (R) Mineral later noted "civil society depends on rule of law. You can't just have the president and his political aides pick and choose what to enforce. Then we have a government of men, not of laws, which John Adams saw as a prime threat to liberty." He also SAID that the inconsistent enforcement could set a precedent where states can legally defend their own interests.
It should be noted that no court or statute has ever refuted the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions penned by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. If the federal government violates the Constitution, according to Madison in the Virginia Resolution, "necessary and proper measures" must be taken to protect the people's rights. Madison never specified what those ought to be. At the very least, it would seem that Virginia, Kentucky, and West Virginia can refer to these works as grounds of legal argument.
Post Script: Full disclosure. I support legalization of medical marijuana. Frankly those who support it should take more issue with the Obama Administration's non enforcement than with either enforcing or getting rid of the law. By not enforcing the law, Obama is allowing businesses to grow. Those businesses will always be subject to legal extortion by the federal government because the law can always be held over them as a Sword of Damocles.
Marshall wrote the opinion broadly enough so that it legally prevented any state from officially acting in contradiction to any federal policy or agency. State police cannot even legally pull over a federal vehicle that is speeding.
Obviously this decision came in the context of its times. The federal government was very small and claimed few powers. Some of the states had existed for almost or over 200 years as political units.
Delegates Kelli Sobonya (R) Cabell, and Darryl Cowles (R) Morgan, think they may see a breach in the iron wall of McCullough.
In a recent Legislative committee meeting on medical marijuana covered by the Charleston Daily Mail , Sobonya queried about the inconsistent enforcement of marijuana laws by the federal government.
If Sobonya and Cowles are right, then the Obama Administration may have opened the door to states ignoring laws that they find onerous to their citizens. EPA regulations and Obamacare were cited by the delegates as examples.
Delegate Gary Howell (R) Mineral later noted "civil society depends on rule of law. You can't just have the president and his political aides pick and choose what to enforce. Then we have a government of men, not of laws, which John Adams saw as a prime threat to liberty." He also SAID that the inconsistent enforcement could set a precedent where states can legally defend their own interests.
It should be noted that no court or statute has ever refuted the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions penned by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. If the federal government violates the Constitution, according to Madison in the Virginia Resolution, "necessary and proper measures" must be taken to protect the people's rights. Madison never specified what those ought to be. At the very least, it would seem that Virginia, Kentucky, and West Virginia can refer to these works as grounds of legal argument.
Post Script: Full disclosure. I support legalization of medical marijuana. Frankly those who support it should take more issue with the Obama Administration's non enforcement than with either enforcing or getting rid of the law. By not enforcing the law, Obama is allowing businesses to grow. Those businesses will always be subject to legal extortion by the federal government because the law can always be held over them as a Sword of Damocles.
Cabell County Delegate Sick of Welfare Subsidized Drug Violence
From Delegate Kelli Sobonya, (R) Cabell County:
I am past sick and tired
of drug thugs taking over our state. The recent Huntington shooting is the last
straw for me. The shooting victims all have criminal records. I'm trying to
find out if any of them are on public assistance. I've cosponsored bills to
require drug testing for taxpayer benefits with leadership standing in the way
of debate. Today, I and Delegate Cowles sent the Secretary of WV DHHR a letter to
give us a full report of how many on public assistance have been convicted of
drug crimes. WV currently has a lifetime ban on drug convicts receiving food
stamps. We've also asked for a report of how this is enforced. I'm calling on
Governor Tomblin to call in the National Guard, much like Georgia and Puerto
Rico have done, to help with our war on drugs. The line in the sand has been
drawn. Drug thugs be on notice. And for those who want to buy or deal drugs on
public assistance, no longer with the taxpayers' or my money!!
Huntington News Net's coverage of the tragedy.
Huntington News Net's coverage of the tragedy.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Obama's Stimulus Mess Continues to Create Havoc
Back in 2009, Obama convinced the Democratic led United States House of Representatives and Senate to pass what the country was told was around $800 billion worth of economic stimulus. Others argue that the real price tag to the country ended up between $1 trillion and $1.7 trillion . Ever since its passage, reports have continued to detail the horrific waste of resources.
Among the first signs of trouble came when Franklin Center reporter Bill McMorris uncovered billions sent to non existent congressional districts. This included assertions by the federal government that $2.5 million in stimulus funds created a total of 14 jobs in the 54th, 9th, 4th, 12th, 13th, and 00th congressional districts in the Mountain State. Elected representatives from each of those districts were all unavailable for comment then or now.
Then came questions from Congress about stimulus funds intended for expanding broadband access in West Virginia. Marmet's tiny public library with a single obsolete computer received a $20,000 router designed for much larger and powerful networks. Similar purchases of expensive equipment went directly into storage because the state had no use for them.
An Obama administration official defended these purchases on the grounds that the state anticipated future needs. It would be interesting to know how much the West Virginia state government anticipates that the Marmet branch of the Kanawha County Public Library will expand.
Now come revelations from the West Virginia Legislature that even more stimulus money was misspent. Furthermore, both the Legislative Auditor Aaron Allred and at least one delegate, Gary Howell of Mineral County, publicly stated that the misuse of money was illegal.
According to the Charleston Daily Mail, money from a $126 million federal grant, which also overpaid for the routers, went towards the construction of a series of microwave towers. The allocation of funds bypassed the bidding process as required by West Virginia law. Non licensed and out-of-state subcontractors did much of the work on the towers while funds were distributed through county governments to avoid state purchasing oversight.
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin has promised to examine the Legislature's report. A decision to request an investigation from the US Attorney's office has not yet been made.
Post Script. This does not mean that all state agencies wasted funds. But the ones who spent responsibly and followed the law are now being combed over by federal auditors. This process uses up countless manhours to answer questions about money that was spent that originally had very few guidelines. Questions must be answered. It is a shame, though, that the foolishness of a few has thrown many state agencies into major behind the scenes anxiety when they acted responsibly all along.
Among the first signs of trouble came when Franklin Center reporter Bill McMorris uncovered billions sent to non existent congressional districts. This included assertions by the federal government that $2.5 million in stimulus funds created a total of 14 jobs in the 54th, 9th, 4th, 12th, 13th, and 00th congressional districts in the Mountain State. Elected representatives from each of those districts were all unavailable for comment then or now.
Then came questions from Congress about stimulus funds intended for expanding broadband access in West Virginia. Marmet's tiny public library with a single obsolete computer received a $20,000 router designed for much larger and powerful networks. Similar purchases of expensive equipment went directly into storage because the state had no use for them.
An Obama administration official defended these purchases on the grounds that the state anticipated future needs. It would be interesting to know how much the West Virginia state government anticipates that the Marmet branch of the Kanawha County Public Library will expand.
Now come revelations from the West Virginia Legislature that even more stimulus money was misspent. Furthermore, both the Legislative Auditor Aaron Allred and at least one delegate, Gary Howell of Mineral County, publicly stated that the misuse of money was illegal.
According to the Charleston Daily Mail, money from a $126 million federal grant, which also overpaid for the routers, went towards the construction of a series of microwave towers. The allocation of funds bypassed the bidding process as required by West Virginia law. Non licensed and out-of-state subcontractors did much of the work on the towers while funds were distributed through county governments to avoid state purchasing oversight.
Governor Earl Ray Tomblin has promised to examine the Legislature's report. A decision to request an investigation from the US Attorney's office has not yet been made.
Post Script. This does not mean that all state agencies wasted funds. But the ones who spent responsibly and followed the law are now being combed over by federal auditors. This process uses up countless manhours to answer questions about money that was spent that originally had very few guidelines. Questions must be answered. It is a shame, though, that the foolishness of a few has thrown many state agencies into major behind the scenes anxiety when they acted responsibly all along.
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
War On Boys: Kids Play With Air Soft Gun, Police Called, Kids Expelled From School
WAVY TV in Virginia's Tidewater section reports that two seventh grade boys will be suspended for a year for playing with toy guns. At home.
A neighbor called police even though she knew that the boys were playing "zombies" with their toy guns. She claimed that she felt "uncomfortable," which must be a crime now in Virginia. The school board met, despite the boys playing on private property, and decided that they needed suspended.
The parents then learned they could send their children to an alternative school, likely one with real criminal offenders.
This follows a now long established pattern of public school systems' increasing prejudice against boys. This article from The Atlantic in 2000 illustrates the problem even back then. Normal boy behavior is increasingly seen as aberrant while girls thrive.
Boys play guns. Boys like to play like they are killing bad guys. This is natural behavior going back to caveman times. Adults should not worry if they like playing at killing bad guys, or in this case zombies. It shows a respect for societal norms. One would think that in choosing a mythical creature as their target instead of a human, they might be praised by the adults around them.
The woman who called police said that it made her uncomfortable to see a boy pointing a gun. He was pointing it at a target when she called.
But no, zero tolerance for common sense is now the norm. Especially in public school.
A neighbor called police even though she knew that the boys were playing "zombies" with their toy guns. She claimed that she felt "uncomfortable," which must be a crime now in Virginia. The school board met, despite the boys playing on private property, and decided that they needed suspended.
The parents then learned they could send their children to an alternative school, likely one with real criminal offenders.
This follows a now long established pattern of public school systems' increasing prejudice against boys. This article from The Atlantic in 2000 illustrates the problem even back then. Normal boy behavior is increasingly seen as aberrant while girls thrive.
Boys play guns. Boys like to play like they are killing bad guys. This is natural behavior going back to caveman times. Adults should not worry if they like playing at killing bad guys, or in this case zombies. It shows a respect for societal norms. One would think that in choosing a mythical creature as their target instead of a human, they might be praised by the adults around them.
The woman who called police said that it made her uncomfortable to see a boy pointing a gun. He was pointing it at a target when she called.
But no, zero tolerance for common sense is now the norm. Especially in public school.
Hollywood Is Not All Leftist. "Hitchcock" Shines With Great Messages
The AMC show Breaking Bad has spawned an entire minor industry of writers great and small commenting on its greatness. It is a great opportunity for the educated to show their knowledge of the history of Western culture, indirectly putting the show in context. Breaking Bad does resemble a multi-year running of a Shakespeare tragedy. Family underlies the entire series. The not perfect Hank Schrader relies on the love and faithfulness of his family while the evil of Walter White embraces manipulating the love, support, sympathy, and faithfulness of his own.
In the wake of the national attention bestowed on television's golden age, the motion picture industry has taken a lot of heat. Its creativity and storytelling has declined in relative, if not absolute, terms.
But it does still have the ability to tell a story.
The movie Hitchcock, starring Sir Anthony Hopkins, has hit cable television. This interpretation relies on two important themes, risk and marriage.
The film begins with Alfred Hitchcock finishing up North By Northwest and looking for something to do. Its storyline hints at some vices, such as his fascination with his blonde stars, and his overindulgence in food and alcohol. He also has noted the gradual drifting apart of his marriage with wife Alma.
Hitchcock finds his new project very quickly. As studios seek to pigeonhole him as a spy thriller director (he is offered what could have been the first James Bond picture), the director searches for a project very different from his previous success.
Then the recently published novel Psycho crosses his desk. Hitchcock immediately jumps on it and ignores the work of a man trying to wriggle into the life of his wife Alma. The trouble comes when the studios reject funding what they assume will be a flop. They do agree to distribute the film if Hitchcock can raise the money himself.
Which he does by taking a heavy mortgage on his home. If Psycho's film version flopped, he faced financial ruin. And therein lies the heroism of capitalism. Believing in a product against the advice of others. Risking security to make it happen. Pouring hard work into a project to make it work. The audience gets to see Hitchcock's pain, his fear, his uncertainty as the film runs into typical problems.
They also see a marriage under strain. Attention given to Alma pays off when she spends more and more time with her friend Whit helping with his book.
In the movie, Psycho is saved when Alma sees what Whit actually is, a cad, and puts more effort into her usual collaboration with her husband. While the film fell flat with Hitchcock alone, the partners and spouses together make it one of the all time greats.
Rarely do the two great themes of modern conservatism, the value of family and capitalism, get intertwined as they do in this film.
As for Hopkins, he once again shows why he is one of the great actors of his time. I had to actually click info to prove to my teenage son that he was seeing Hopkins. As a special treat, on another channel, Silence of the Lambs came on directly after we finished watching Hitchcock. Seeing one after the other shows the range of this great man.
As for Hitchcock the movie, definitely see it. No beautiful young people in sexual situations or explosions, but it is an honestly good story that is pretty well told.
In the wake of the national attention bestowed on television's golden age, the motion picture industry has taken a lot of heat. Its creativity and storytelling has declined in relative, if not absolute, terms.
But it does still have the ability to tell a story.
The movie Hitchcock, starring Sir Anthony Hopkins, has hit cable television. This interpretation relies on two important themes, risk and marriage.
The film begins with Alfred Hitchcock finishing up North By Northwest and looking for something to do. Its storyline hints at some vices, such as his fascination with his blonde stars, and his overindulgence in food and alcohol. He also has noted the gradual drifting apart of his marriage with wife Alma.
Hitchcock finds his new project very quickly. As studios seek to pigeonhole him as a spy thriller director (he is offered what could have been the first James Bond picture), the director searches for a project very different from his previous success.
Then the recently published novel Psycho crosses his desk. Hitchcock immediately jumps on it and ignores the work of a man trying to wriggle into the life of his wife Alma. The trouble comes when the studios reject funding what they assume will be a flop. They do agree to distribute the film if Hitchcock can raise the money himself.
Which he does by taking a heavy mortgage on his home. If Psycho's film version flopped, he faced financial ruin. And therein lies the heroism of capitalism. Believing in a product against the advice of others. Risking security to make it happen. Pouring hard work into a project to make it work. The audience gets to see Hitchcock's pain, his fear, his uncertainty as the film runs into typical problems.
They also see a marriage under strain. Attention given to Alma pays off when she spends more and more time with her friend Whit helping with his book.
In the movie, Psycho is saved when Alma sees what Whit actually is, a cad, and puts more effort into her usual collaboration with her husband. While the film fell flat with Hitchcock alone, the partners and spouses together make it one of the all time greats.
Rarely do the two great themes of modern conservatism, the value of family and capitalism, get intertwined as they do in this film.
As for Hopkins, he once again shows why he is one of the great actors of his time. I had to actually click info to prove to my teenage son that he was seeing Hopkins. As a special treat, on another channel, Silence of the Lambs came on directly after we finished watching Hitchcock. Seeing one after the other shows the range of this great man.
As for Hitchcock the movie, definitely see it. No beautiful young people in sexual situations or explosions, but it is an honestly good story that is pretty well told.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Team Mingo Once Again In the News
No need to write a long drawn out story or commentary on this. Kate White of the Charleston Gazette tells the story admirably.
Read it and ponder the question why. Why do some constituencies continually return not just corruption, but incompetent and malevolent corruption? They don't get financial benefits. They don't get superior services. They certainly don't get good government or qualified law enforcement. At least the "boss" style mayors like Richard Daley in Chicago could deliver some kind of success.
Mingo County gets to live with the mortification that one of its elected officials will be sentenced for extorting probably less than $100 worth of tire discounts from a local business.
It is a train wreck. Even worse than the ill fated "City of Jefferson" in Kanawha County that was governed for the strip clubs, by the strip clubs, and of the strip clubs. Whether or not you approve of strip clubs, few would argue that they are good administrators of government.
Mingo County is populated by good people who work hard, who have faith in God, and want better for themselves and their children. They've certainly had more than their share of problems. While they do deserve better, reality starkly says (to paraphrase Stephen King) that what you vote for is what you own and what you own always comes home to you.
The bottom row on the slate features names under investigation, under arrest, or assassinated.
Read it and ponder the question why. Why do some constituencies continually return not just corruption, but incompetent and malevolent corruption? They don't get financial benefits. They don't get superior services. They certainly don't get good government or qualified law enforcement. At least the "boss" style mayors like Richard Daley in Chicago could deliver some kind of success.
Mingo County gets to live with the mortification that one of its elected officials will be sentenced for extorting probably less than $100 worth of tire discounts from a local business.
It is a train wreck. Even worse than the ill fated "City of Jefferson" in Kanawha County that was governed for the strip clubs, by the strip clubs, and of the strip clubs. Whether or not you approve of strip clubs, few would argue that they are good administrators of government.
Mingo County is populated by good people who work hard, who have faith in God, and want better for themselves and their children. They've certainly had more than their share of problems. While they do deserve better, reality starkly says (to paraphrase Stephen King) that what you vote for is what you own and what you own always comes home to you.
The bottom row on the slate features names under investigation, under arrest, or assassinated.
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.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
McKinley Explains Disconnect Between Rural and Urban Solutions
In a town hall meeting in Wiley Ford, Mineral County recently, Representative David McKinley (R) (WV-1) talked about a conversation that he had with an urban congressman.
McKinley talked with the congressman about the difference between urban and rural areas, bringing up countryside institutions such as volunteer fire departments.
His congressional conversational partner reacted with surprise. People will risk their lives fighting fires for free?
One could see how this could save Detroit, for instance. Cut costs by bringing some country common sense to struggling big cities. People will volunteer to fight fires because they care about their communities. With more engagement comes more pride.
It also shows that cities could learn some ideas from long established rural practices.
In his first year of office, President George W. Bush worked to try and build volunteer efforts in the inner cities based on supporting the efforts of churches. It may be time to try and put those kinds of ideas to work again.
(This is a corrected version of earlier blog that made mistaken attributions to Congressman McKinley. Apologies!)
McKinley talked with the congressman about the difference between urban and rural areas, bringing up countryside institutions such as volunteer fire departments.
His congressional conversational partner reacted with surprise. People will risk their lives fighting fires for free?
One could see how this could save Detroit, for instance. Cut costs by bringing some country common sense to struggling big cities. People will volunteer to fight fires because they care about their communities. With more engagement comes more pride.
It also shows that cities could learn some ideas from long established rural practices.
In his first year of office, President George W. Bush worked to try and build volunteer efforts in the inner cities based on supporting the efforts of churches. It may be time to try and put those kinds of ideas to work again.
(This is a corrected version of earlier blog that made mistaken attributions to Congressman McKinley. Apologies!)
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
National Democrats Convince Cannon Fodder Candidate
By all accounts, Secretary of State Natalie Tennant will enter the US Senate race to take on presumed Republican nominee Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito.
On the surface, it looks like an appropriate move for a popular young statewide officeholder with definite ambitions to rise higher. She has a strong background as an elected secretary of state with experience as a Charleston television news figure. Even in a loss, Tennant can use the campaign to reintroduce herself to voters across the state in preparation for a run at the Governor's Mansion.
It is this ambition most threatened by her Senate run. A deeper look shows how dicey this campaign could be for Tennant.
Images like this one have already reappeared. Standing in front of a sparse crowd of Obama supporters will not win Tennant any support in a state whose Democrats preferred a prisoner in 2012. Obama has only lost popularity since then. She struggles to argue that coal jobs have slightly ticked up, but cannot defend the power plant closings that are coming. Or the dramatic rise in health insurance costs from Obamacare.
In a race for governor in 2016, Obama matters less. Tennant will have difficulty shaking the perception that she will be anything but a water carrier for the presidency and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Senator Joe Manchin learned that even piecemeal support for Obama policies can take a drastic toll on polling numbers.
Capito's fundraising prowess, formidable campaign team, and popularity have vanquished all comers since 2000. Few major donors outside of the Democratic Party will seek to invest in a race that has little chance of success.
Tennant's run only makes sense in the national Democratic big picture. A viable candidate forces the Republican Party to spend resources and raise money in a race that they should ultimately win. Those resources will not go to tighter races with less chance of success.
She will also have to tie herself even more securely to the highly unpopular national Democratic Party agenda. A gubernatorial race allows her to stand aloof as Earl Ray Tomblin did. Tennant cannot erase images from a Senate run that will place her even more strongly into the camp of individuals heartily disliked across West Virginia. She also cannot haul out the well worn liberal "War on Women" card against a respected, accomplished, and popular female candidate like Capito.
This serves the purposes of the West Virginia Republican Party nicely because it will weaken an individual who was expected to make a strong run for governor in 2016.
On the surface, it looks like an appropriate move for a popular young statewide officeholder with definite ambitions to rise higher. She has a strong background as an elected secretary of state with experience as a Charleston television news figure. Even in a loss, Tennant can use the campaign to reintroduce herself to voters across the state in preparation for a run at the Governor's Mansion.
It is this ambition most threatened by her Senate run. A deeper look shows how dicey this campaign could be for Tennant.
Images like this one have already reappeared. Standing in front of a sparse crowd of Obama supporters will not win Tennant any support in a state whose Democrats preferred a prisoner in 2012. Obama has only lost popularity since then. She struggles to argue that coal jobs have slightly ticked up, but cannot defend the power plant closings that are coming. Or the dramatic rise in health insurance costs from Obamacare.
In a race for governor in 2016, Obama matters less. Tennant will have difficulty shaking the perception that she will be anything but a water carrier for the presidency and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Senator Joe Manchin learned that even piecemeal support for Obama policies can take a drastic toll on polling numbers.
Capito's fundraising prowess, formidable campaign team, and popularity have vanquished all comers since 2000. Few major donors outside of the Democratic Party will seek to invest in a race that has little chance of success.
Tennant's run only makes sense in the national Democratic big picture. A viable candidate forces the Republican Party to spend resources and raise money in a race that they should ultimately win. Those resources will not go to tighter races with less chance of success.
She will also have to tie herself even more securely to the highly unpopular national Democratic Party agenda. A gubernatorial race allows her to stand aloof as Earl Ray Tomblin did. Tennant cannot erase images from a Senate run that will place her even more strongly into the camp of individuals heartily disliked across West Virginia. She also cannot haul out the well worn liberal "War on Women" card against a respected, accomplished, and popular female candidate like Capito.
This serves the purposes of the West Virginia Republican Party nicely because it will weaken an individual who was expected to make a strong run for governor in 2016.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Maryland's Mini Secession Movement: Freedom, Dollars, and Common Sense
Across the country, secession movements have served as the face of frustration for rural residents. States dominated by urban and suburban elites continue to rile countryside conservatives. In an increasing number of states, counties have considered secession as the answer.
Active movements have sprouted in Northern California, Colorado, Michigan, and now Maryland.
According to Fox News, many of the complaints are the same. Residents chafe under onerous restrictions on land that hurt farmers. They also oppose gun control laws backed by suburbanites.
Some Marylanders already made the decision to secede as individuals. Most prominently, former Maryland state senator and Republican Party chair Alex Mooney crossed the Potomac from Frederick County to Charles Town, West Virginia. His run for Congress puts a face on the long trend of Maryland counties losing opportunities to competition south of the Potomac.
A study of West Virginia and bordering Maryland counties using numbers from the US Census Bureau's County Business Patterns data shows Mountain State counties faring better even with poorer infrastructure.
For example, Maryland's Allegany County, centered around Cumberland, had 1,847 private sector business establishments employing 25,136 in 2000. By 2011, 1,647 employed 24,485. Neighboring Mineral County saw some jumps. In 2000, 480 establishments employed exactly 5,000 workers. Eleven years later, the number of businesses dropped to 452, but the number of workers shot up to 6,445.
The numbers from Mineral County are still stagnant in many ways. That area however, unlike Allegany, does not benefit from an interstate or any other four lane highway bisecting it.
Differences also emerge between Washington County, Maryland (surrounding Hagerstown), and Berkeley County, West Virginia. Between 2000 and 2011, Washington County lost almost 3,000 workers while Berkeley added over a thousand. Between 1990 and 2010, Washington County's population increased by around 25 percent while Berkeley's shot up by a little over 40 percent.
Washington County should benefit from the intersection of Interstates 70 and 81, two of the most traveled in the Eastern United States. While Berkeley County has an excellent transportation infrastructure as well as Interstate 81, it is more beneficial to local travel.
Speculation that Marylanders may be seeking better opportunities and a way of life across the border would be tough to prove without further study. The Mercatus Center's Freedom In the Fifty States Study shows little difference between West Virginia's overall rank of 44 and Maryland's of 42. The study applauds West Virginia's ranking of ninth on personal freedoms, while Maryland hovers near the bottom among the least free societies in the United States.
Individuals abandoning their native states in search of better economic and social opportunities has helped to define the history of the nation. But the 21st century wrinkle of seeking out areas friendlier to beliefs about government and freedom are playing out in interesting and unpredictable ways.
At any rate the Potomac Valley counties of West Virginia, despite handicaps from inferior infrastructure and a system unfriendly to business, outperform their Maryland counterparts.
Less freedom, fewer opportunities. No wonder western Marylanders have given up on Annapolis. Time for those in Charleston to wake up and take advantage.
Active movements have sprouted in Northern California, Colorado, Michigan, and now Maryland.
According to Fox News, many of the complaints are the same. Residents chafe under onerous restrictions on land that hurt farmers. They also oppose gun control laws backed by suburbanites.
Some Marylanders already made the decision to secede as individuals. Most prominently, former Maryland state senator and Republican Party chair Alex Mooney crossed the Potomac from Frederick County to Charles Town, West Virginia. His run for Congress puts a face on the long trend of Maryland counties losing opportunities to competition south of the Potomac.
A study of West Virginia and bordering Maryland counties using numbers from the US Census Bureau's County Business Patterns data shows Mountain State counties faring better even with poorer infrastructure.
For example, Maryland's Allegany County, centered around Cumberland, had 1,847 private sector business establishments employing 25,136 in 2000. By 2011, 1,647 employed 24,485. Neighboring Mineral County saw some jumps. In 2000, 480 establishments employed exactly 5,000 workers. Eleven years later, the number of businesses dropped to 452, but the number of workers shot up to 6,445.
The numbers from Mineral County are still stagnant in many ways. That area however, unlike Allegany, does not benefit from an interstate or any other four lane highway bisecting it.
Differences also emerge between Washington County, Maryland (surrounding Hagerstown), and Berkeley County, West Virginia. Between 2000 and 2011, Washington County lost almost 3,000 workers while Berkeley added over a thousand. Between 1990 and 2010, Washington County's population increased by around 25 percent while Berkeley's shot up by a little over 40 percent.
Washington County should benefit from the intersection of Interstates 70 and 81, two of the most traveled in the Eastern United States. While Berkeley County has an excellent transportation infrastructure as well as Interstate 81, it is more beneficial to local travel.
Speculation that Marylanders may be seeking better opportunities and a way of life across the border would be tough to prove without further study. The Mercatus Center's Freedom In the Fifty States Study shows little difference between West Virginia's overall rank of 44 and Maryland's of 42. The study applauds West Virginia's ranking of ninth on personal freedoms, while Maryland hovers near the bottom among the least free societies in the United States.
Individuals abandoning their native states in search of better economic and social opportunities has helped to define the history of the nation. But the 21st century wrinkle of seeking out areas friendlier to beliefs about government and freedom are playing out in interesting and unpredictable ways.
At any rate the Potomac Valley counties of West Virginia, despite handicaps from inferior infrastructure and a system unfriendly to business, outperform their Maryland counterparts.
Less freedom, fewer opportunities. No wonder western Marylanders have given up on Annapolis. Time for those in Charleston to wake up and take advantage.
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.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
EPA SWAT Style Raid on Mines Raises Questions About Militarization of Police
Federal agents wearing menacing black uniforms, body armor and carrying automatic weapons went into action recently. Using commando style tactics, they forced their way onto private property to detain individuals and locate evidence of wrongdoing.
Did agents break up a clique of terrorists? Did they find the hideout of a dangerous gang?
No. They were enforcing the Clean Water Act on an Alaska gold mine. And now United States Senators are demanding answers.
A Daily Caller investigation shows that the EPA did more than simply over equip its agents on a routine investigation. It also lied when asked why it adopted such extreme measures.
The EPA claimed that it told Alaska State Police that the targets were involved with drugs and human trafficking (mind you, in Chicken, Alaska.) State Police spokesmen strongly dispute the EPA claims.
John Stossel in Reason points out that SWAT raids have increased from 300 per year to over a hundred per day. He describes how SWAT teams even descended upon organic farms to end the dire social threat of unpasteurized milk.
Politicians accepted the idea that the war on drugs might mean reduced private property rights. It ended up in every police department wanting military style equipment. This resulted in police "terrorizing innocent people, raiding the wrong house and causing violence."
The vast majority of SWAT raids descend upon people suspected of drug possession or trafficking, even if the individual has no history of violence. Other agencies fear the threat from . . . libertarians. Concord, New Hampshire police justified the purchase of an armored vehicle to stave off "daily challenges" posed by libertarians.
In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act. After the Civil War, the Army had been called upon in certain situations to act as law enforcement. Lawmakers recognized that the mission of the Army, to seek out and destroy foreign enemies, did not make it a viable police force. Congress forbade the military forces of the United States from doing routine law enforcement.
As a result, police forces emerged in most state and local jurisdictions by the end of World War I. Sheriff's departments dated back to medieval England, but most states did not create their own police forces until around a century ago. Cities had done so earlier, around the end of the 19th century. Interestingly, the colors of police uniforms reflect when they were created. As the US military went from dark blue to khaki in the 1890s, city police used surplus uniforms. State trooper dress still resembles that of World War I era soldiers.
They, however, retained the distinction between police technique and military tactics.
In the past generation, police have increasingly adopted military style weapons and tactics. In selected situations, this is reasonable. Violent street gangs' illicit acquisition of automatic weapons meant that police have to keep up to keep from being outgunned. Fair enough.
But police forces need stricter guidelines to govern when they may go into full commando mode. Raiding a lair of the dangerous MS-13 gang, yes. Raiding an organic farm selling raw milk (and perhaps a little weed), no.
The Department of Education even has a SWAT team to attack those accused of ducking student loans!
Police serve and protect. The military defends the nation and destroys its enemies. All too often in recent years, law enforcement at all levels has chosen to terrify the public rather than to serve it. Not every situation can be handled in the Sheriff Andy Taylor manner, without use of weapons and trusting in the goodness of the public, but a boundaries must be drawn.
And federal agencies without law enforcement missions must be stripped of enforcement agents.
The spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act relies on the idea of separation between the military and law enforcement. Police should not be routinely equipped and trained as if they patrol the streets of an Afghan village. Current practice does not violate the letter of this important act, but it certainly contradicts the spirit.
The militarization of police at all levels is one of the most serious threats to liberty.
Did agents break up a clique of terrorists? Did they find the hideout of a dangerous gang?
No. They were enforcing the Clean Water Act on an Alaska gold mine. And now United States Senators are demanding answers.
A Daily Caller investigation shows that the EPA did more than simply over equip its agents on a routine investigation. It also lied when asked why it adopted such extreme measures.
The EPA claimed that it told Alaska State Police that the targets were involved with drugs and human trafficking (mind you, in Chicken, Alaska.) State Police spokesmen strongly dispute the EPA claims.
John Stossel in Reason points out that SWAT raids have increased from 300 per year to over a hundred per day. He describes how SWAT teams even descended upon organic farms to end the dire social threat of unpasteurized milk.
Politicians accepted the idea that the war on drugs might mean reduced private property rights. It ended up in every police department wanting military style equipment. This resulted in police "terrorizing innocent people, raiding the wrong house and causing violence."
The vast majority of SWAT raids descend upon people suspected of drug possession or trafficking, even if the individual has no history of violence. Other agencies fear the threat from . . . libertarians. Concord, New Hampshire police justified the purchase of an armored vehicle to stave off "daily challenges" posed by libertarians.
In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act. After the Civil War, the Army had been called upon in certain situations to act as law enforcement. Lawmakers recognized that the mission of the Army, to seek out and destroy foreign enemies, did not make it a viable police force. Congress forbade the military forces of the United States from doing routine law enforcement.
As a result, police forces emerged in most state and local jurisdictions by the end of World War I. Sheriff's departments dated back to medieval England, but most states did not create their own police forces until around a century ago. Cities had done so earlier, around the end of the 19th century. Interestingly, the colors of police uniforms reflect when they were created. As the US military went from dark blue to khaki in the 1890s, city police used surplus uniforms. State trooper dress still resembles that of World War I era soldiers.
They, however, retained the distinction between police technique and military tactics.
In the past generation, police have increasingly adopted military style weapons and tactics. In selected situations, this is reasonable. Violent street gangs' illicit acquisition of automatic weapons meant that police have to keep up to keep from being outgunned. Fair enough.
But police forces need stricter guidelines to govern when they may go into full commando mode. Raiding a lair of the dangerous MS-13 gang, yes. Raiding an organic farm selling raw milk (and perhaps a little weed), no.
The Department of Education even has a SWAT team to attack those accused of ducking student loans!
Police serve and protect. The military defends the nation and destroys its enemies. All too often in recent years, law enforcement at all levels has chosen to terrify the public rather than to serve it. Not every situation can be handled in the Sheriff Andy Taylor manner, without use of weapons and trusting in the goodness of the public, but a boundaries must be drawn.
And federal agencies without law enforcement missions must be stripped of enforcement agents.
The spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act relies on the idea of separation between the military and law enforcement. Police should not be routinely equipped and trained as if they patrol the streets of an Afghan village. Current practice does not violate the letter of this important act, but it certainly contradicts the spirit.
The militarization of police at all levels is one of the most serious threats to liberty.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Remember . . .
Remember the Twin Towers in New York City . . .
Remember the fallen from the Pentagon . . .
Remember those who fought back above a quiet field in Pennsylvania . . .
Remember those left behind in Benghazi . . .
Remember . . .
Remember the fallen from the Pentagon . . .
Remember those who fought back above a quiet field in Pennsylvania . . .
Remember those left behind in Benghazi . . .
Remember . . .
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
What Is the EPA Hiding and Why?
Secrecy is essential at some levels of government. The CIA, NSA, Department of Defense, and other agencies must hide at least some of what they do to effectively promote national security. The FBI cannot release information about ongoing criminal investigations.
But why does the Environmental Protection Agency have or need a culture of "secrecy and evasion?"
The Daily Caller examined a blistering report by Senate Republicans that relates several shady practices. It refused to answer some Freedom of Information Act requests. When it did, it redacted the necessary information. EPA officials also used secret email accounts to communicate on policy. These would be more difficult for journalists and other investigators to uncover.
Courts have slapped down EPA overreach before. An Obama appointee ruled that the EPA acted improperly when it revoked a Logan County coal operator's permit. Although an appeals court reversed the ruling, the Supreme Court may likely rule in favor of the operator. The EPA is currently battling a Hardy County farmer because, among other things, it claims that her farm produces too much dust. It also criticized a judge's ruling to allow the Farm Bureau to join the suit. Of course without the resources of the Farm Bureau, the farmer might not be able to continue to pay lawyers to keep the fight going.
Even mine workers' union leader Cecil Roberts used colorful language to describe the EPA's intent to kill the coal industry.
The EPA uses intimidation by lawsuit, secretive tactics, and other methods to attack property rights, family farms, and profitable businesses. This brings negligible benefit to the environment, but expands the control of Washington bureaucrats over lives and jobs.
Time to bring transparency to bureaucracy. The EPA does not just wage war on coal or family farms, but against the rights of individuals to responsibly make decisions about their property and states to enforce reasonable regulations.
Friday, September 6, 2013
Time For the Private Sector to Take Over Space Development
Not too long ago, space program superfans watched with dismay as NASA grounded its decades old space shuttle fleet. Built in the 1970s, used and reused through the 2000s, the small fleet of ships that launched like rockets and landed like planes caught the imagination of and twice overwhelmed the nation in tragedy.
When grounded, many thought that space dreams had been put on hold.
The private sector, led by Virgin, has zoomed ahead. Its prototype Galactic SS2 was towed by a cargo plane, released, then fired a booster that propelled it almost 70,000 feet in the air. This is twice as high as commercial airlines and is also the cruising altitude of the Lockheed U2 spy plane of the 1950s. It then opened a unique reentry system designed to reduce the heat of friction on reentering the atmosphere.
While it still has not reached the 80,000 feet limit established by the SR 71 Blackbird, the Galactic SS2 is designed to go much farther. Virgin will likely be the first commercial carrier to take passengers into outer space.
Space travel offers a faster ride than is possible now. Jetliners generally cruise at 600 MPH. The supersonic Concorde plane has not flown in many years. It hit Mach 1.7, but was only economically viable for long flights. The SS2 should fly at 2,500 MPH once it exits the atmosphere. The lack of friction means that it can fly faster and expend less energy.
Virgin may or may not profit from this development. But it is showing the world that the government monopoly on space travel is over.
When grounded, many thought that space dreams had been put on hold.
The private sector, led by Virgin, has zoomed ahead. Its prototype Galactic SS2 was towed by a cargo plane, released, then fired a booster that propelled it almost 70,000 feet in the air. This is twice as high as commercial airlines and is also the cruising altitude of the Lockheed U2 spy plane of the 1950s. It then opened a unique reentry system designed to reduce the heat of friction on reentering the atmosphere.
While it still has not reached the 80,000 feet limit established by the SR 71 Blackbird, the Galactic SS2 is designed to go much farther. Virgin will likely be the first commercial carrier to take passengers into outer space.
Space travel offers a faster ride than is possible now. Jetliners generally cruise at 600 MPH. The supersonic Concorde plane has not flown in many years. It hit Mach 1.7, but was only economically viable for long flights. The SS2 should fly at 2,500 MPH once it exits the atmosphere. The lack of friction means that it can fly faster and expend less energy.
Virgin may or may not profit from this development. But it is showing the world that the government monopoly on space travel is over.
Thursday, September 5, 2013
The Risky Bet On Higher Education As An Economic Development Powerhouse
States have relied more and more on higher education to fuel economic development. Recent trends, however, should force policymakers to rethink.
Ted Boettner, the executive director of the West Virginia Center for Budget and Policy told West Virginia Metro News that the state economy in 30 years needed to diversify. He included higher education as an important part of moving toward a knowledge and technology based workforce.
Others note that colleges and universities have done a poor job remaining relevant to an ever changing and more competitive workforce.
For example, Poynter.org's study on the State of Journalism Education found that only 28 percent of journalism professionals found a college degree in their field to be very important. Over 3/4 of journalism professors thought it was "very important." Increasingly the media field regards experience based internships as more important than traditional journalism school.
And journalism is not the only field undergoing this shift.
Former Secretary of Education William Bennett questioned whether the modern college offered much at all to many young people looking to acquire work skills.
Enrollment numbers show that young people are examining the costs and benefits of college much more closely. A half a million fewer individuals enrolled in college last year than the year before. Tuition hikes, student loan debt, and missing out on paid skills development during those years have changed minds. Young people no longer see college as an automatic necessity for success.
Employers have slowly moved toward assessing potential hires based upon knowledge rather than earned degrees. People can obtain knowledge through webinars, massive open online courses (MOOCs), internships, or other ways.
Conversely, colleges and universities have not been able to provide educations that prepare students for real world employment. Liberal arts schools, in all fairness, are not meant for that purpose. Land grant universities, however, have moved away from their original purpose. They were originally supposed to prepare students for work in agriculture, mining, or industrial work. Many have moved far afield from the original purpose of preparing students to work and lead in a technologically advancing world.
Colleges and universities have been seen in the past 20 years as economic engines. Federal and private sector money concentrates into cities like Morgantown and Huntington. Ever increasing student populations help to spur the local service industry.
In the meantime, corporations have scaled back management and employee training programs that tailored employees for the particular needs of the company. Private sector research has declined in terms of money spent compared to higher education. But is higher education research more economically productive than that done by companies?
For the foreseeable future, debt ridden federal government will have less to spend on research grants. Students are finding alternatives to college educations. With such trends developing, relying on higher education to spur the local or state economy is a risky proposition.
Ted Boettner, the executive director of the West Virginia Center for Budget and Policy told West Virginia Metro News that the state economy in 30 years needed to diversify. He included higher education as an important part of moving toward a knowledge and technology based workforce.
Others note that colleges and universities have done a poor job remaining relevant to an ever changing and more competitive workforce.
For example, Poynter.org's study on the State of Journalism Education found that only 28 percent of journalism professionals found a college degree in their field to be very important. Over 3/4 of journalism professors thought it was "very important." Increasingly the media field regards experience based internships as more important than traditional journalism school.
And journalism is not the only field undergoing this shift.
Former Secretary of Education William Bennett questioned whether the modern college offered much at all to many young people looking to acquire work skills.
Enrollment numbers show that young people are examining the costs and benefits of college much more closely. A half a million fewer individuals enrolled in college last year than the year before. Tuition hikes, student loan debt, and missing out on paid skills development during those years have changed minds. Young people no longer see college as an automatic necessity for success.
Employers have slowly moved toward assessing potential hires based upon knowledge rather than earned degrees. People can obtain knowledge through webinars, massive open online courses (MOOCs), internships, or other ways.
Conversely, colleges and universities have not been able to provide educations that prepare students for real world employment. Liberal arts schools, in all fairness, are not meant for that purpose. Land grant universities, however, have moved away from their original purpose. They were originally supposed to prepare students for work in agriculture, mining, or industrial work. Many have moved far afield from the original purpose of preparing students to work and lead in a technologically advancing world.
Colleges and universities have been seen in the past 20 years as economic engines. Federal and private sector money concentrates into cities like Morgantown and Huntington. Ever increasing student populations help to spur the local service industry.
In the meantime, corporations have scaled back management and employee training programs that tailored employees for the particular needs of the company. Private sector research has declined in terms of money spent compared to higher education. But is higher education research more economically productive than that done by companies?
For the foreseeable future, debt ridden federal government will have less to spend on research grants. Students are finding alternatives to college educations. With such trends developing, relying on higher education to spur the local or state economy is a risky proposition.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
The Allure of Infamy
Yesterday afternoon, Lavar Arrington on his Washington DC based drive time radio show compared the Saturday antics of Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel to singer Miley Cyrus. He pointed out that both individuals used their talents to boost their notoriety rather than their fame.
Neither of them are the first to figure out that bad deeds get more attention. Sometimes this works, but for other people infamy burned out their abilities and the public's patience.
One such example of infamous success was James Gordon Bennett, who has been described as "one of the gamiest characters ever to appear in the world of New York journalism." He founded the New York Herald and made it a success based on the city's hatred of him. Bennett in the 1830s and 40s spun tales of scandal, pornography, and defamation in a day where those convicted suffered a horsewhipping. He used even these tales to feed the hunger of a market salivating for salaciousness. Sheer circulation made Bennett and his notorious paper a political force in a powerful city.
New York also nurtured the outrageous personalities of Senator Roscoe Conkling, Joe Namath and George Steinbrenner.
But for every Bennett comes a thousand or more Icaruses for whom the image outpaced the substance. Bennett, Namath, Steinbrenner, and others of their ilk worked hard to build the substance beneath the style. They never confused image with accomplishment.
Notoriety is freely gained, but lasting success must be earned. Even in today's reality television environment, programs like "Duck Dynasty" have outstripped numerous other shows about pretty young people being pretty and young. The market is more interested in watching people who produce and profit.
Enter the earlier compared individuals. First, Miley Cyrus. She had established a strong career path that started with acting, then branched into singing. Then, either out of rebellion, weirdness, or calculated career movement, she went for the lowest common denominator of entertaining, stripping down and singing about partying and sex. Her recent television performance garnered her everything from accusations of racism to outright ridicule.
In other words, people saw a cheap stunt for what it was.
The sun has already singed Johnny Manziel's feathers. The freshman Heisman Trophy winner from last year turned quickly into the most hated individual in North American sports. Manziel may or may not have signed autographs for cash, but few see that alone as a moral failing. The NCAA suspended him for a half of a game because they could find no evidence to prove what they thought that he did. For a brief second, the NCAA was the bad guy picking on a 20 year old kid.
Then came the strangeness of the part of his game against Rice where he was allowed to appear. He scored touchdowns, but also taunted opposing players (of Rice, mind you, hardly a powerhouse) with hand gestures indicating autograph signing and demanding money. He then showed complete disrespect to the coach who put him on the stage when he was removed for generally behaving like an ass.
This came after a fun off season of trashing his own university, behaving like a boor at a University of Texas college party, and generally acting like, as Brian Urlacher said this week, "a punk."
Even though he comes from a family with generations of flouting the rules, Manziel courts disaster.
He may not realize it, but the NFL has seen this act before. Usually it falls flat. General managers and coaches want to invest endless hours of time and many millions of dollars into players they can believe in. Quarterbacks are especially dicey. The right one can set a team up for a decade of success. The wrong one can deliver heartbreak and coach firings fairly quickly.
Some busts, like JaMarcus Russell, suffered from a handicapping condition. Russell had sleep apnea, slept through meetings, got cut, gained weight, and will never play again. Ryan Leaf had a bit of Manziel's bad boy persona and flamed out quickly. Tim Tebow behaved properly, worked like a madman, but did not pan out because the NFL demands more precise abilities than he could muster.
And some great college quarterbacks just don't have the brains or the thick skin to handle the intellectual and emotionally rigorous demands. The job also requires intense discipline. Manziel has already shown that he lacks this. Wide receivers, some defensive players, and a few other positions can be characters to an extent. Quarterbacks have to be machines. They can have personalities, but those must come second to the work and the leadership.
In short, if you want to make the NFL as a quarterback, act like all four of the Redskins quarterbacks. Robert Griffin III is charismatic without being arrogant, hardworking without bragging, swagger based on substance. Kirk Cousins is the direct understudy. He knows that he will only start if disaster strikes, but works with the coaches, remains upbeat, and bides his time. Rex Grossman serves as the elder statesman. Much maligned (with reason, he does throw a ton of interceptions) he serves as an extra coach to mentor the three younger men playing his position. Last on the list comes the rare fourth string quarterback Pat White. He frittered away his first opportunity at Miami, but came back this summer. Grit, physical courage, intelligent game management, and determination won him a spot, at least for now. If the Redskins ever release him, many other teams have also expressed interest.
In short, none of them are knuckleheads and all are on track to pursue their dreams.
Antics grow old because a person has to top their last stunt to keep people's attention. One can only get so far and then people stop paying attention. Or they get in the way of what the person is actually supposed to be doing. Miley Cyrus's next stop is Sydney Leathers and Kim Kardashian style pornography. Unless Manziel gets his mind right, he might find his draft stock drop considerably.
Attention does not equal accomplishment. Maybe the likely falls of Cyrus and Manziel could serve as object lessons for the next generation. But as long as people equate infamy with success, that is unlikely
Neither of them are the first to figure out that bad deeds get more attention. Sometimes this works, but for other people infamy burned out their abilities and the public's patience.
One such example of infamous success was James Gordon Bennett, who has been described as "one of the gamiest characters ever to appear in the world of New York journalism." He founded the New York Herald and made it a success based on the city's hatred of him. Bennett in the 1830s and 40s spun tales of scandal, pornography, and defamation in a day where those convicted suffered a horsewhipping. He used even these tales to feed the hunger of a market salivating for salaciousness. Sheer circulation made Bennett and his notorious paper a political force in a powerful city.
New York also nurtured the outrageous personalities of Senator Roscoe Conkling, Joe Namath and George Steinbrenner.
But for every Bennett comes a thousand or more Icaruses for whom the image outpaced the substance. Bennett, Namath, Steinbrenner, and others of their ilk worked hard to build the substance beneath the style. They never confused image with accomplishment.
Notoriety is freely gained, but lasting success must be earned. Even in today's reality television environment, programs like "Duck Dynasty" have outstripped numerous other shows about pretty young people being pretty and young. The market is more interested in watching people who produce and profit.
Enter the earlier compared individuals. First, Miley Cyrus. She had established a strong career path that started with acting, then branched into singing. Then, either out of rebellion, weirdness, or calculated career movement, she went for the lowest common denominator of entertaining, stripping down and singing about partying and sex. Her recent television performance garnered her everything from accusations of racism to outright ridicule.
In other words, people saw a cheap stunt for what it was.
The sun has already singed Johnny Manziel's feathers. The freshman Heisman Trophy winner from last year turned quickly into the most hated individual in North American sports. Manziel may or may not have signed autographs for cash, but few see that alone as a moral failing. The NCAA suspended him for a half of a game because they could find no evidence to prove what they thought that he did. For a brief second, the NCAA was the bad guy picking on a 20 year old kid.
Then came the strangeness of the part of his game against Rice where he was allowed to appear. He scored touchdowns, but also taunted opposing players (of Rice, mind you, hardly a powerhouse) with hand gestures indicating autograph signing and demanding money. He then showed complete disrespect to the coach who put him on the stage when he was removed for generally behaving like an ass.
This came after a fun off season of trashing his own university, behaving like a boor at a University of Texas college party, and generally acting like, as Brian Urlacher said this week, "a punk."
Even though he comes from a family with generations of flouting the rules, Manziel courts disaster.
He may not realize it, but the NFL has seen this act before. Usually it falls flat. General managers and coaches want to invest endless hours of time and many millions of dollars into players they can believe in. Quarterbacks are especially dicey. The right one can set a team up for a decade of success. The wrong one can deliver heartbreak and coach firings fairly quickly.
Some busts, like JaMarcus Russell, suffered from a handicapping condition. Russell had sleep apnea, slept through meetings, got cut, gained weight, and will never play again. Ryan Leaf had a bit of Manziel's bad boy persona and flamed out quickly. Tim Tebow behaved properly, worked like a madman, but did not pan out because the NFL demands more precise abilities than he could muster.
And some great college quarterbacks just don't have the brains or the thick skin to handle the intellectual and emotionally rigorous demands. The job also requires intense discipline. Manziel has already shown that he lacks this. Wide receivers, some defensive players, and a few other positions can be characters to an extent. Quarterbacks have to be machines. They can have personalities, but those must come second to the work and the leadership.
In short, if you want to make the NFL as a quarterback, act like all four of the Redskins quarterbacks. Robert Griffin III is charismatic without being arrogant, hardworking without bragging, swagger based on substance. Kirk Cousins is the direct understudy. He knows that he will only start if disaster strikes, but works with the coaches, remains upbeat, and bides his time. Rex Grossman serves as the elder statesman. Much maligned (with reason, he does throw a ton of interceptions) he serves as an extra coach to mentor the three younger men playing his position. Last on the list comes the rare fourth string quarterback Pat White. He frittered away his first opportunity at Miami, but came back this summer. Grit, physical courage, intelligent game management, and determination won him a spot, at least for now. If the Redskins ever release him, many other teams have also expressed interest.
In short, none of them are knuckleheads and all are on track to pursue their dreams.
Antics grow old because a person has to top their last stunt to keep people's attention. One can only get so far and then people stop paying attention. Or they get in the way of what the person is actually supposed to be doing. Miley Cyrus's next stop is Sydney Leathers and Kim Kardashian style pornography. Unless Manziel gets his mind right, he might find his draft stock drop considerably.
Attention does not equal accomplishment. Maybe the likely falls of Cyrus and Manziel could serve as object lessons for the next generation. But as long as people equate infamy with success, that is unlikely
Friday, August 30, 2013
Obama Is Another Politician Who Is "No Jack Kennedy"
In the 1988 vice presidential debates, Democratic nominee Lloyd Bentsen shoved a rhetorical shiv deep into George H. W. Bush's running mate Dan Quayle. Quayle somehow compared himself to John F. Kennedy and Bentsen responded with one of the great defining "gotchas" in debate history. "You, sir, are no Jack Kennedy."
Bentsen wanted to take a dig at Quayle, sure. But his greater intent lay in showing that Dan Quayle was not a serious enough individual to be so close to presidential power. Bentsen may have been right or wrong about that assumption, and curiously enough, he actually was not a friend of Kennedy's. But he did speak to the hearts of many who do worry about the White House not being in serious hands.
A little over 50 years ago, Kennedy confronted Cuba and the Soviet Union over missiles placed there by the Communist nations. Doing nothing meant accepting a mortal threat to the southeastern United States. Too much response could lead to regional or even global war. Kennedy knew about the missiles for some time before the public. In October 1962, it became international news. The president took 13 days to craft his response.
During the entire time, Kennedy met with a specially convened executive committee, nicknamed "ExCom." This committee included representatives from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the National Security Committee, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and others. Kennedy observed as they debated every possible option. From watching these debates, Kennedy was able to intelligently rule out some options, such as air strikes and invasions, while putting together the best peaceable alternatives. He preserved American integrity while achieving the national goal. Whatever other faults he had, John F. Kennedy knew how to use and listen to advisers during a world crisis.
Yesterday, Obama's top team on Syria met with congressional representatives to discuss US options. Meanwhile, Obama met with Magic Johnson.
That alone should be an impeachable offense. This man does not take his job seriously. He has no sense of priorities.
Bentsen wanted to take a dig at Quayle, sure. But his greater intent lay in showing that Dan Quayle was not a serious enough individual to be so close to presidential power. Bentsen may have been right or wrong about that assumption, and curiously enough, he actually was not a friend of Kennedy's. But he did speak to the hearts of many who do worry about the White House not being in serious hands.
A little over 50 years ago, Kennedy confronted Cuba and the Soviet Union over missiles placed there by the Communist nations. Doing nothing meant accepting a mortal threat to the southeastern United States. Too much response could lead to regional or even global war. Kennedy knew about the missiles for some time before the public. In October 1962, it became international news. The president took 13 days to craft his response.
During the entire time, Kennedy met with a specially convened executive committee, nicknamed "ExCom." This committee included representatives from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the National Security Committee, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and others. Kennedy observed as they debated every possible option. From watching these debates, Kennedy was able to intelligently rule out some options, such as air strikes and invasions, while putting together the best peaceable alternatives. He preserved American integrity while achieving the national goal. Whatever other faults he had, John F. Kennedy knew how to use and listen to advisers during a world crisis.
Yesterday, Obama's top team on Syria met with congressional representatives to discuss US options. Meanwhile, Obama met with Magic Johnson.
That alone should be an impeachable offense. This man does not take his job seriously. He has no sense of priorities.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Unleashing the Dogs of War . . . Or At Least A Limited Strike
The worst kept secret on the planet right now is that the United States, and perhaps other allies as well, will launch some sort of attack on Syria in the near future.
Last summer, Obama declared that one of his "red lines" was the use of weapons of mass destruction. Last week, someone in the Assad "administration" apparently used them to kill, among others, many hundreds of civilians.
US intelligence sources cite a strange intercepted phone call within the Syrian government camp as proof. A Syrian defense official demanded an explanation for why chemical weapons were launched. If one was forthcoming, the rationale has not yet been released.
This raises questions about the Syrian government. Was the attack the work of a rogue officer? Was it a direct order from the highest levels of government? Is the Syrian government even a cohesive unit anymore?
In any event, Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron seem to agree that a response must occur.
Cameron plans to consult with Parliament. At this time, however, Obama seems to have no plans to request authorization from Congress. Although some congressional Republicans have offered muted support, Senator Rand Paul (Ky.) claimed that Syrian events had "no clear national security connection" to the United States. Paul did not rule out action, but asked that Obama consult with Congress meaningfully before acting.
In this case, rushing to action within a few days does not seem absolutely necessary. The repulsiveness of the attack is not likely to wear out. Indeed the United Nations investigators will undoubtedly either uncover more evidence and details that maintain world disgust, or Syrian officials will block them entirely. The UN has requested four days, which does not seem unreasonable. President George W. Bush gave them much longer before launching war against Iraq.
Syria presents US policy makers considerable trouble. The rebel targets of government chemical weapons have shown themselves no less murderous than Assad's thugs. Islamicist rebels have slaughtered Roman Catholic clergy among many other innocents during their own reign of terror.
President Bush had some "good guys" to work with when he overturned Saddam Hussein's thugocracy. Syria seems to have few or no credible leaders who could make a peaceful republic work.
This limits Obama's options. Any Iraq style invasion would require a much more powerful force prepared to stay in place for much longer. Nation building would by necessity look more like colonization.
Any boots on the ground would likely end badly for the United States. In the mid 1980s, President Reagan deployed Marines to serve as part of a peacekeeping unit to try and bring stability to Lebanon. Terrorists killed over 200. After a few good-bye blasts from the USS New Jersey, American forces skedaddled.
The various Lebanese factions had no desire to play nice just because American and European soldiers showed up. They continued killing each other and blowing up heaps of rubble until they exhausted their will to fight. Lebanon has remained relatively peaceable ever since.
So ground based combat forces will not work.
That leaves air strikes and/or covert operations. The CIA does need to infiltrate Syria. To make reasonable decisions, American leaders need to have knowledge of what is going on and who makes it happen. It needs to monitor individuals and groups as they refine terror techniques. Covert teams can also find locations of important sites in case stronger military action is required.
Air strikes would have to be very precise and specific. Former Representative and anti-war crusader Dennis Kucinich noted that air strikes by American planes would make them Al Qaeda's air force. Indiscriminate targeting of Syrian government military forces would help clear the road for an even worse regime. Conversely, firing a couple of Tomahawk missiles in the general direction of Assad makes American power look downright petty and even silly.
Take the time to identify chemical weapons facilities. Only target them. Use weapons capable of doing the job, like daisy cutters. Cruise missiles may not deliver enough punch. This will achieve a limited goal and curb WMD attacks in the future without overly involving the US or using military action as a public relations stunt.
Obama must also prepare to stand by Israel. Attacks on Syria may provoke a response against Israel. Specific tactical actions may be necessary against any force deployed to strike Israel. On the other hand, it is difficult to see how effectively Syria could strike Israel while struggling in its own civil war.
Obama must make wise decisions here, stick by them, and articulate explanations. He must have the specific goal of curbing WMD usage while rebuilding respect for American power. If he covers his bases with Congress and the United Nations, this could help reconstruct respect for US foreign policy that has fallen greatly since Bush left office.
Many unmarked cliffs and chasms loom in the road ahead. Obama will have to tread carefully as he acts.
Last summer, Obama declared that one of his "red lines" was the use of weapons of mass destruction. Last week, someone in the Assad "administration" apparently used them to kill, among others, many hundreds of civilians.
US intelligence sources cite a strange intercepted phone call within the Syrian government camp as proof. A Syrian defense official demanded an explanation for why chemical weapons were launched. If one was forthcoming, the rationale has not yet been released.
This raises questions about the Syrian government. Was the attack the work of a rogue officer? Was it a direct order from the highest levels of government? Is the Syrian government even a cohesive unit anymore?
In any event, Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron seem to agree that a response must occur.
Cameron plans to consult with Parliament. At this time, however, Obama seems to have no plans to request authorization from Congress. Although some congressional Republicans have offered muted support, Senator Rand Paul (Ky.) claimed that Syrian events had "no clear national security connection" to the United States. Paul did not rule out action, but asked that Obama consult with Congress meaningfully before acting.
In this case, rushing to action within a few days does not seem absolutely necessary. The repulsiveness of the attack is not likely to wear out. Indeed the United Nations investigators will undoubtedly either uncover more evidence and details that maintain world disgust, or Syrian officials will block them entirely. The UN has requested four days, which does not seem unreasonable. President George W. Bush gave them much longer before launching war against Iraq.
Syria presents US policy makers considerable trouble. The rebel targets of government chemical weapons have shown themselves no less murderous than Assad's thugs. Islamicist rebels have slaughtered Roman Catholic clergy among many other innocents during their own reign of terror.
President Bush had some "good guys" to work with when he overturned Saddam Hussein's thugocracy. Syria seems to have few or no credible leaders who could make a peaceful republic work.
This limits Obama's options. Any Iraq style invasion would require a much more powerful force prepared to stay in place for much longer. Nation building would by necessity look more like colonization.
Any boots on the ground would likely end badly for the United States. In the mid 1980s, President Reagan deployed Marines to serve as part of a peacekeeping unit to try and bring stability to Lebanon. Terrorists killed over 200. After a few good-bye blasts from the USS New Jersey, American forces skedaddled.
The various Lebanese factions had no desire to play nice just because American and European soldiers showed up. They continued killing each other and blowing up heaps of rubble until they exhausted their will to fight. Lebanon has remained relatively peaceable ever since.
So ground based combat forces will not work.
That leaves air strikes and/or covert operations. The CIA does need to infiltrate Syria. To make reasonable decisions, American leaders need to have knowledge of what is going on and who makes it happen. It needs to monitor individuals and groups as they refine terror techniques. Covert teams can also find locations of important sites in case stronger military action is required.
Air strikes would have to be very precise and specific. Former Representative and anti-war crusader Dennis Kucinich noted that air strikes by American planes would make them Al Qaeda's air force. Indiscriminate targeting of Syrian government military forces would help clear the road for an even worse regime. Conversely, firing a couple of Tomahawk missiles in the general direction of Assad makes American power look downright petty and even silly.
Take the time to identify chemical weapons facilities. Only target them. Use weapons capable of doing the job, like daisy cutters. Cruise missiles may not deliver enough punch. This will achieve a limited goal and curb WMD attacks in the future without overly involving the US or using military action as a public relations stunt.
Obama must also prepare to stand by Israel. Attacks on Syria may provoke a response against Israel. Specific tactical actions may be necessary against any force deployed to strike Israel. On the other hand, it is difficult to see how effectively Syria could strike Israel while struggling in its own civil war.
Obama must make wise decisions here, stick by them, and articulate explanations. He must have the specific goal of curbing WMD usage while rebuilding respect for American power. If he covers his bases with Congress and the United Nations, this could help reconstruct respect for US foreign policy that has fallen greatly since Bush left office.
Many unmarked cliffs and chasms loom in the road ahead. Obama will have to tread carefully as he acts.
Transcript of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have A Dream Speech" 50 Years Later
Transcript of Martin Luther King Jr.'s 'I have a dream' speech
Published August 27, 2013
| FoxNews.com
I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.
But 100 years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.
In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men -- yes, black men as well as white men -- would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check that has come back marked "insufficient funds."
But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.
It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. 1963 is not an end but a beginning. Those who hoped that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.
But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.
As we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating "for whites only." We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.
I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.
Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.
Let us not wallow in the valley of despair. I say to you today my friends -- so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.
This will be the day, this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning "My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my father's died, land of the Pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring!"
And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true. And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.
Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.
But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi -- from every mountainside.
Let freedom ring. And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring -- when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children -- black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics -- will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/27/transcript-martin-luther-king-jr-have-dream-speech/print#ixzz2dGwH0sSC
Monday, August 26, 2013
Universities That Begged For Subsidies Now Fight Obama's Power Grab
They begged for them and got them. But at what price?
The college and university system in the United States fought long and hard to obtain as much student aid and tuition subsidies as possible from the federal government. And now, Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney explains that their chickens have come home to roost.
Last week, Obama gave a higher education speech. It addressed the endless upward spiral of tuition and debt, as well as the declining value of a college education in many fields. What was Obama's idea? As usual, let the federal government handle it.
Obama proposed that the federal government rate colleges (based on what criteria!) to determine which offered the best educational value. Suddenly, hard bitten liberal and left wing academics protested like Tea Party activists about the potential for political abuse.
Carney quoted former Harvard president Derek Bok, "I have to be somewhat apprehensive when any force as powerful as the federal government undertakes the task."
William and Mary economics department chair David H. Feldman warned in the Chronicle of Higher Education that tying outcomes to funding would force colleges and universities to reject at-risk students who could come and do well otherwise.
Others say that the information proposed as a baseline to analysis is incomplete.
The universities themselves invited this bind. They begged for the subsidies and got them. Then, as years passed, they built dorms that would make an Embassy Suites blush. They bloated salaries, travel budgets, and other perquisites of office. Higher education went on spending sprees, leaving faculty salaries and cash strapped students in the dust.
Now the federal government proposes to meddle in higher education in the same way that it has ripped apart the public school systems. Killing it with kindly bureaucratic help.
Interestingly, all that stands in the way of Obama is House Republicans. Congress has refused to authorize the sweeping data collection needed by the federal government to implement this. That being said, some conservatives may agree that the federal government deserves more bang for its buck. It is not as if academia has ever given Republicans a reason to offer a helping hand.
Not to mention that overspending taxpayer funds created this mess for the colleges
Will left wing higher education-ocrats deign to work with the Republican Party? Stay tuned!
The college and university system in the United States fought long and hard to obtain as much student aid and tuition subsidies as possible from the federal government. And now, Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney explains that their chickens have come home to roost.
Last week, Obama gave a higher education speech. It addressed the endless upward spiral of tuition and debt, as well as the declining value of a college education in many fields. What was Obama's idea? As usual, let the federal government handle it.
Obama proposed that the federal government rate colleges (based on what criteria!) to determine which offered the best educational value. Suddenly, hard bitten liberal and left wing academics protested like Tea Party activists about the potential for political abuse.
Carney quoted former Harvard president Derek Bok, "I have to be somewhat apprehensive when any force as powerful as the federal government undertakes the task."
William and Mary economics department chair David H. Feldman warned in the Chronicle of Higher Education that tying outcomes to funding would force colleges and universities to reject at-risk students who could come and do well otherwise.
Others say that the information proposed as a baseline to analysis is incomplete.
The universities themselves invited this bind. They begged for the subsidies and got them. Then, as years passed, they built dorms that would make an Embassy Suites blush. They bloated salaries, travel budgets, and other perquisites of office. Higher education went on spending sprees, leaving faculty salaries and cash strapped students in the dust.
Now the federal government proposes to meddle in higher education in the same way that it has ripped apart the public school systems. Killing it with kindly bureaucratic help.
Interestingly, all that stands in the way of Obama is House Republicans. Congress has refused to authorize the sweeping data collection needed by the federal government to implement this. That being said, some conservatives may agree that the federal government deserves more bang for its buck. It is not as if academia has ever given Republicans a reason to offer a helping hand.
Not to mention that overspending taxpayer funds created this mess for the colleges
Will left wing higher education-ocrats deign to work with the Republican Party? Stay tuned!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)