Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Nice Guys Don't Always Finish Last



Bill Stewart, above all other things, is a nice guy.

The million dollar question on a lot of folks' minds today is "what does Bill Stewart think."

Oliver Luck, West Virginia University's athletic director, has apparently inked Bill Stewart's replacement starting in 2012. Dana Holgerson has crafted top notch offensive units for Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. He has agreed to be West Virginia's offensive coordinator next year and head coach in 2012. In an interesting twist, Holgerson turned down Pitt's offer to become head coach there immediately.

Stewart agreed to be head coach next year and presumably will afterwards move upstairs to a soft and lucrative job in the athletic department. Barring disaster, he will retire with the best winning percentage of any coach in West Virginia history, at leats two bowl wins and one conference championship under his belt. Pretty good for a guy with a losing record at Virginia Military Institute prior to his stint here.

It is possible that Stewart has grown weary of the abusiveness of a certain segment of the fan base who believed that their school should have looked a little harder at different options to replace Rodriguez. If he was part of this process, it would be good to hear that from him. If he was not part of the process, it shows a possibly necessary ruthlessness on the part of Luck. The team seemed to lose focus at times this year on the offensive side of the ball. The offensive line had not progressed as fast as some had hoped. Skilled players fumbled balls without even being hit. Current offensive coordinator Jeff Mullen obviously will not be invited back. However Jeff Casteel, architect of one of college football's most punishing defenses, has agreed to stay on under the new regime.

Stewart's success at West Virginia includes more than wins. He has recruited top flight talent on both sides of the ball, which should give the new OC a lot of options next year. However, the perception is that West Virginia slipped from a top fifteen program to one once again hovering on the edges of the top twenty.

If the coaching staff can work together next year, this team has a chance at accomplishing some big things. Stewart can have a farewell tour and over time, memory of his coaching tenure will be that of a Beleinlike transition period. You liked the guy, he had some nice wins, but he probably was not going to get you to the top. Holgerson can take the next year as an understudy and learn how to build and manage a program. Some coordinators make that jump pretty well, others don't.

Hopefully this is yet another success authored by Oliver Luck.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

This Is Not a Joke: Michelle Obama Claims That Overweight Children Threaten National Security

There are few people in power in the federal government right now who are more absurd than Michelle Obama. The First Lady is looking very hard to make herself relevant to DC and the nation at large. Like many before her, she has latched onto a cause.

Laura Bush's passion was literacy. She wanted kids to read more books. Education and wide ranging reading expand the mind and enhance teh value of the free citizen on an individual basis.

Michelle Obama has bought into the notion that obesity is one of the greatest problems to ever strike the United States. Apparently when the vast majority of people have more than enough access to food that can sustain them, it's a bad thing. But don't worry, MO has a plan. Congress just passed a $4.5 billion spending bill to address childhood obesity. That'll cure it right?

In the speech after the bill's passage, she actually said that childhood obesity is a national security problem. Nothing that Joe Biden has said has ever approached the strangeness of this assertion. She claimed that if one in four kids were obese, then we would not have enough to recruit for the armed forces.

Let's see. Two million were in the military at its peak during the Cold War, outside of Korea and Vietnam. Probably 2.2 million or so today. We are a nation of over 300 million. That means that less than 1% of the population is in the military at any time. They can probably safely draw from the 75% of the nation, according to her numbers, that are not overweight.

She also said that the issue just cannot be left up to the parents. This is a red flag. Reducing freedom for the sake of the children is a common tactic of nanny staters. You never know precisely what their end game is, but you can bet that their "concern" does not stop with the children.

In all honesty, there are other reasons why kids might be overweight. Let's look at the elimination of recess and physical education classes. Let's look at the long bus rides taken by kids in consolidated school districts. Consolidation also reduces the opportunities to play team sports. Let's look at an antiquated time change structure that makes it dark at 4:30-5:00 PM in the winter. When are kids supposed to exercise if they so desire?

Friday, December 10, 2010

West Virginia Legislature Is Poised to Retaliate In the War on Coal

The original Constitution established a balance of power between the federal government, states, and the people. Protections in the original seven articles. such as state selection of senators and the Electoral College, helped to create that balance. The Tenth Amendment in no uncertain terms protected the rights of states against federal encroachment.

Over the past century, we have seen this balance erode. Popular election of senators seems more democratic, but it leaves state governments subject to congressional action while having no voice in the process. The expansion of the Interstate Comnmerce Clause to form the basis of the Civil Rights Acts was necessary only in that situation, but it has formed the basis of federal regulatory action in a wide variety of areas. Executive orders have become a dictatorial function; witness Obama's theft of over a hundred thousand acres of Alaskan land last week.

Individual Americans and state governments have passively watched these transformations for decades under the assumption that the intentions behind the accumulation of power were good. Most of them likely were intended to increase comfort and prosperity. Under Obama, however, the executive rbanch has a new agenda. It wants to slice away at American manufacturing and redistribute wealth within America and around the world. It has no problem creating artificial shortages of energy and rising prices by restricting coal and oil production. It seems to want the third world to gain more manufacturing jobs at the expense of Americans. Regulatory law has become an intolerable burden on so many facets of society from education to business. The EPA, as we have said time and time again, has made it worse.

When the federal government abuses its power, states must stand up. Governor Rick Perry of Texas refused to accept federal education dollars in exchange for giving more authority over curriculum over to the federal Department of Education. And now West Virginia is showing states how to fight the War on Coal.

Delegate Gary Howell (R) 49th is poised to introduce a bill next month that will limit the scope of the Environmental Protection Agency in West Virginia. It will deny the EPA jurisdiction over coal operations that only sell to a consumer in West Virginia. For example, if a mine only sells to the massive John Amos power plant near Charleston, its operation only falls under state authority instead of federal. This limits the scope of the EPA and potentially every federal agency if the model is followed in other areas. If passed, it could redefine the relationship between states and the federal government, restoring some of the lost balance intended by the Founding Fathers.

Some will ask if we can be sure that our environment will be protected by the state as thoroughly as the federal government. My answer is that West Virginia voters will have a lot more input on environmental policy if the state is controlling it. The EPA is as far removed from state voters as the Queen of England. It forgets that it is part of a federal republic beholden to the people. State governments will not. They will recognize the conservation agenda that balances the needs of man and of nature, not the radical environmentalists who would see West Virginians drop back to the stone age.

We must get the word out about the Intrastate Coal and Use Act both within West Virginia and around the country. This could be one of the opening shots in a true political revolution.

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Name That "Martyr"





In the history of presidents, there have been some amazingly bad retorical choices made that veer from the paranoid to the blasphemous to the insane. See if you can guess which president mouthed which words.


1.“It’s tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed. In this case, the hostage was the American people, and I was not willing to see them get harmed.”


2. "The gentleman calls for three names. I am talking to my friends and fellow-citizens here Suppose I should name to you those whom I look upon as being opposed to the fundamental principles of this Government, and as now laboring to destroy them. I say Thaddeus Stevens, of Pennsylvania; I say Charles Sumner, of Massachusetts; I say Wendell Phillips, of Massachusetts..."


3."Who has suffered more than I have? I ask the question. I shall not recount the wrongs and the sufferings inflicted on me. It is not the course to deal with a whole people in a spirit of revenge....I have quite as much asperity, and perhaps as much resentment, as a man ought to have, but we must reason regarding man as he is, and must conform our action and our conduct to the example of him who founded our holy religion"


The first snippet is from a press conference yesterday that might rank as the point at which everyone became certain that Obama may be psychologically damaged. Both the Left and Right reacted with shock at the incoherence, the meandering, and the declining position of this president.

The next two come from Andrew Johnson's infamous Washington's Birthday speech. During this classic, he compares himself to Christ and his GOP enemies to Confederates and Judas Iscariot. And we all know what came of Johnson.

A National Review piece is linked below.

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/254727/obama-unravels?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4cfe961f160942d4,0

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

FCC Aims to Open the Door to Federal Control Over Television Media

One of America's greatest assets is its free market media. News and other television media groups can operate fairly freely under the First Amendment. Now the new FCC chairman, Michael Copps, is considering strict federal controls over broadcasters that would put them under stringent controls aimed at making them more publicly responsible (at least as far as the federal government is concerned.) Copps' issue is news. He believes that news is not as good as it used to be and that it fails to properly inform the public.

Who does this guy think he is? America's news outlets serve the public as it wants to be served. Fox and MSNBC are the obvious targets here. Note Senator Rockefeller's diatribe last month which seems to point to these very proposals.

We live in a free society based on choice. We do not need the FCC run by a Joseph Goebbels. We the people simply wish to be left alone. He wants pressure groups to have government sanctioned influence over the news and entertainment choices offered by the media.

Left wingers blame the news for last year's election. They will do anything possible to manipulate the media. They simply cannot believe that people can inform themselves and make their own choices.

Last, but not least, this is a constitutional issue. The federal government wants to control the message, violating the First Amendment in the process. This must not happen.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

A Day Which Will Live in Infamy

President Franklin D. Roosevelt: Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.
The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our secretary of state a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.
It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.
The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.
Yesterday the Japanese government also launched as attack against Malaya.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.
Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Wake Island.
And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.
Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As commander in chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. . .

Monday, December 6, 2010

The "Doomsday" File

Julian Assange, Number One of Wikileaks, has threatened to expose to the public a "doomasday" file that potentially contains everything from UFOs to the secret recipe of Coca-Cola (yes I am kidding!) This file apparently does have some actual stuff from BP, Bank of America, and the federal government. Assange wants to be free from not only U. S. arrest for dumping secrets, but also a sexual assault charge in Sweden.

It's hard to get a bead on Assange. Is he a guy that has a sincere belief that openness will help world conditions? Or is he a Bond villain style megalomaniac who is only seeking to destabilize and destroy?

To me it is more mundane. He craves attention. He cries out with every action "look at me!" hence the Bond villain style threat to destroy the world by releasing even more gossip between kings and diplomats, or maybe some callous statements by some executive in corporate America.

Fact is that the release of this information has had a very limited impact on most Americans. We know that information was compromised, but we're not shocked that Kentucky Fried Chicken and Coca Cola keep their secrets better than the feds. And while a lot of the released information was damaging, much of it also sounds like 7th grade gossip about who likes who and who is going to whose party. None of it has toppled a government.

And now the "Doomsday file." I am not sure if any file of any information that Assange has left could topple anyone. A few people get fired, a few PR firms make more money, life goes on. Most likely it is a bluff, an Al Capone's Vault in cyberspace. In any event, calling it the doomsday file makes it seem like the most important information on Earth. Unless it proves that we really are hiding UFOs or Lyndon Johnson and a time traveling Trilateral Commission shot JFK, then it will not live up to its billing.

It's much ado about Assange. And that is the way he wants it.

Friday, December 3, 2010

What Is the Point of This?

http://www.kxly.com/news/25975011/detail.html

The above story describes a Hayden, Idaho man's construction of a hooded Ku Klux Klansman complete with noose.

First of all, let's not make this into a statement about people from Idaho or the state itself. Every state has people living in it whose views are fairly uninformed or downright stupid. Idaho is a wonderful place filled with wonderful people.

However, the frontyard Klansman is a huge monument to at best bad taste, at the worst an evil heart. What kind of person endorses the hanging of other people simply due to race or religion? The Ku Klux Klan victimized and brutalized blacks, Jews and Catholics in their heyday. They blew up schools and churches. They were the most dangerous domestic terrorist group in American history. My grandmother used to tell stories about how they would terrorize Catholics.

Should it be removed or taken down by the town? Not at all. First of all, it advertises exactly who and what this man is. Most people will shun him for it. Second, Americans have discovered that when you do not attack this kind of speech with government force, you deny it any kind of rebellion based credibility. He's not being attacked by the system, he's just one kook. European hate speech statutes have actually encouraged the growth of neo Nazism and skinhead movements.

Hopefully this person learns some kind of respect for other people, but he probably will not. His isolation and humiliation will be punishment enough.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Judges Gone Wild


There was a time when judges and the law profession at large understood the concept of "justiciability." In other words, they understood that judges should not cross into areas better addressed by the executive or legislative branches. This tended to keep caseloads a lot smaller and also kept federal judges from making decisions better left to elected officials.
This concept went out the window a long time ago.
Judge Carrie Webster has halted the West Virginia AAA title game that was supposed to have been played this weekend. Earlier in the state playoffs a fight broke out between players of Hurricane and South Charleston High Schools. The referees ejected the players with fourteen seconds left. Judge Webster said that the officials overstepped their legal bounds. The story can be followed from the link below:
Judge Webster has worked hard to immerse herself into a high school football controversey so that she can garner a lot of headlines and attention. What she has failed to do is to remember a judge's place. This is a job best handled by the other branches of government, not by Judge Webster. She should have dismissed any appeal to the courts as non justiciable and thrown the issue back to the WVSSAC where it belongs.
Judges across the country are on a power trip, seeing themselves as arbiters of nearly any possible situation. This ultimately wastes taxpayer time and money while increasing the stress on an already overburdened justice system.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

DREAM Act Dead For Now


The Senate on Monday killed a defense appropriation bill that, in the Bizarro World of Congress, means that the DREAM Act is also dead for the forseeable future.
The defense bill, for the most part, addresses the need for routine appropriations for the war. However, Democratic congressmen attached two significant "riders" that had nothing to do with appropriations. One eliminated "don't ask, don't tell." The other, the aforementioned DREAM Act, would have given citizenship to any illegal who spent two years in college or the military.
This was widely seen as a Democratic ploy to increase their voter registrations before 2012. However, many on the Democratic side also feared the national security issues that instant citizenship could create. Two years in college could legalize the status of drug cartel people or Middle Eastern terrorists.
Two Democrats joined the GOP in making sure that the numbers were there to fillibuster the bill. It is widely anticipated that the defense bill will return soon without the DREAM Act provision.

Monday, November 29, 2010

The Difference Between Debt and Deficit Is Well Understood


Earlier today, Obama proposed that federal salaries be frozen in place for two years to try and address the federal deficit. While that is a good idea in itself, it ought not be seen as a major part of the solution.

For a long time, politicians have counted on the notion that the public does not differentiate between the deficit (how much more we spend every year versus how much we take in) and the debt (how much we owe in total.)

The difference between the deficit and debt is like a quadruple layer cake with only a thin layer of icing on the top. Lowering the deficit is nice, but it does not solve the problem of spending more than our country makes in revenue. We cannot simply lower the deficit and then pat ourselves on the back and say good job. The deficit needs to disappear completely and we need to put money into paying down the debt.

To accomplish real debt reduction, we need to change our expectations of government and limit what we expect from it. We cannot build every road that anyone proposes. We cannot afford every single expensive program that comes down the pike. We should always be asking, like families, "Do we need this? Is there a less expensive alternative? How can we fit this into a rational budget?" Most importantly, we can ask "can the private sector do this better?"

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Yeager Airport (Charleston) Director Weighs In Against TSA

According to a West Virginia Metro News story, Yeager Airport Director Rick Atkinson is sounding off against the invasive pat downs implemented at many airports across the country. Atkinson says the TSA may be going too far.

He is right and also rightfully concerned. Only 15% of people in many polls have a problem with the nude body scanners, but many more have a problem with the "invasive" pat downs unveiled for this holiday season. Reports have even shown three year old children crying hysterically as a TSA official tries to run hands over the child's body. A man recovering from bladder cancer had his urine bag upset after he repeatedly warned them of its presence. He had to go on a plane covered in his own waste.

While these searches can find non metallic substances that can be threatening to a plane in flight, clearly they upset a large number of people. Airlines and airports may see much less traffic on short to moderate length plane trips as people decide to simply drive or not go at all. The new procedures also have extended the length of time passed in one's attempt to eventually board a plane. The flights to many normal destinations have become too burdensome and inconvenient and the free market will respond.

Of course the airlines will see a drop in revenues, causing them to demand compensation (i. e. bailout) money from the government caused by the actions of the government and the adverse publicity generated. Airports such as Yeager in Charleston will also suffer.

It's time for a new tactic. Get TSA hands away from sensitive parts of people's bodies.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Unfit For Office


It's not often that I say this, even about an extreme leftist. The voters pick who they want and they have the responsibility to live with their choice. However, I doubt that the voters of West Virginia understood that a part of Senator Rockefeller wants to wish away the First Amendment and get rid of FOX News and MSNBC.
Rockefeller comes from a very patrician family. That means that he descends from forefathers who felt that they had the right and the responsibility to exercise power. In Europe, they would carry the title of "Duke" or "Prince" in front of their last names. Here in America, they just try to influence as much as possible. By and large, most politically active members of the Rockefeller family have expressed little support for the dignity of the common man as an individual, although they express much love for "the people" as a group.
I'll address this next part to the Senator. "Faith" in government comes when government is responsive to the people and respects their rights to innocent life, liberty, and pursuit of and retention of, property. When the government sticks to its basic roles and functions, people will have more faith. However we are not meant to have too much faith. We need to be skeptical. Government should be, but rarely is, our obedient servant and we must keep a watchful eye upon it. Government is run by humans who are not always saints. They at times will lie, steal, cheat, and work hard to keep their power. Having faith does not mean that we always extend complete trust.
The fact is that FOX and MSNBC serve a purpose. They are part of that watchful eye on the government and they do not fail to report on the shortcomings of their political opponents. This has the result of making each party and ideological group more responsive because they know that eyes are on them all of the time.
FOX and MSNBC are also symbols of a free society in action. In our country, when it comes to politics, we exchange heated words instead of bullets and bombs. They are a sign of a healthy political society because no one is afraid to speak their mind and no one is shooting at each other. We should embrace the political society that spawns these organizations instead of bashing it.
When it comes down to it, the Bill of Rights is paramount. When Senator Rockefeller officially and publicly expresses the wistful desire to destroy the natural rights of both conservatives and leftists to speak freely, he has made himself unfit to serve.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Question of How a Special Election Should Be Handled For West Virginia State Governor

"7-16. Vacancy in governorship, how filled.In case of the death, conviction or impeachment, failure to qualify, resignation, or other disability of the governor, the president of the Senate shall act as governor until the vacancy is filled, or the disability removed; and if the president of the Senate, for any of the above named causes, shall become incapable of performing the duties of governor, the same shall devolve upon the speaker of the House of Delegates; and in all other cases where there is no one to act as governor, one shall be chosen by joint vote of the Legislature. Whenever a vacancy shall occur in the office of governor before the first three years of the term shall have expired, a new election for governor shall take place to fill the vacancy." You can find that here. http://www.legis.state.wv.us/WVCODE/WV_CON.cfm#articleVII

If you have an opinion, contact your state legislator as soon as possible!

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Brilliant

Just got finished watching a TiVoed version of Sarah Palin's Alaska. This show whose pilot was watched by five million (a TLC record for a pilot show) cannot fail to counter the attempts by others in the media to paint her as extreme, not too bright, or whatever else it comes up with.

Her critics will point to it as evidence that they were right all along and so will her supporters. Everyone else will see an accomplished, intelligent family woman expressing pride in her state and kin. Palin comes across on this show as genuine and real, a person whose concerns are by and large our concerns. She is definitely one of those American politicians like Lincoln, Truman, Lyndon Johnson and George W. Bush who speak plainly and honestly. Some like that and some do not.

Palin spends too much time talking about her neighbor and saying that she is not worried about what he does. If you hadn't heard, he is a critical writer putting together a hit piece on her while living next door. She mentions quite a few times how much he kind of bothers them, but they don't let it bother them too much. It's pretty apparent that the neighbor bothers them quite a bit.

With this program, assuming she is running for president in 2012, Sarah Palin has lightning in a bottle. As long as she maintains the balance between scenery and family, personality and politics, she can attract a broad audience and show people who she really is.

Except for resigning early as governor (a decision I still have a problem with), Palin has shown that in campaigning, for the most part, she remains ahead of the curve. This show ought to boost her to the front of GOP candidates. Woe be unto other aspiring politicians who try the same thing. Palin has a special charisma that most of them lack.

This show is her equivalent of Reagan's "A Time For Choosing" speech in 1964. It introduces her to the nation, but strictly on her own terms.

Politically masterful.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Haeth Shuler Might Take On His Toughest Competition

Heath Shuler knows what it is like to face some of the toughest men in the country. As a former Tennessee and Washington Redskins quarterback, he had to stand tough while the meanest, most ruthless, and angriest defensive players in the SEC and NFL took aim at him.

He might face tougher odds now and put himself more on the line than ever. This time his fearsome opponent may not Ray Lewis or someone like that, but a middle aged woman. Shuler is considering running against Nancy Pelosi for House Minority Leader.

He's not going to win. Republicans seized a large number of the seats held by moderate or conservative Democrats who were done in mostly by their last vote for Pelosi. Shuler needs to do something to keep himself relevant to conservative North Carolina voters and obviously is not prepared to switch parties (that is, unless this is a dramatic way to prepare his constituents for that kind of switch.)

Shuler could have a game plan here. If he warming voters up for a party switch, or a run for governor, or something else? He knows where the blitz will be coming from, the far left in Congress and the Republican right at home. A good quarterback anticipates the blitz and throws it in the direction of the blitz because there will usually be someone open. A tough quarterback stands in and takes the hit to make the successful play. So to which side will Shuler pass, right or left? He will take a hit either way. The question is, will he make the right decision so he can continue to be relevant in the game?

Friday, November 12, 2010

How Can a School Teach About the Rights of People When They are Violators of Rights Themselves?



How will the Republic end? It's a question that many ask in many different walks of life. We are under threat now, but what problems could undermine it further?

I suggest that the public school system may unwittingly be conditioning our schoolchildren into sacrificing safety for security in the vain attempt to prevent any tragedy on any level anywhere. To me, that is a much, much larger tragedy than successfully finding out that Johnny smoked a joint last weekend. We are conditioning children to believe that their personal and private bodily fluids are subject to seizure without cause and without a court issued warrant as the Constitution demands. If they do not comply, they are barred from driving to school or participating in extracurricular activities. However, here is the bigger issue. If they get comfortable with this treatment, what will they tolerate as adults for the so-called public good? This is a Bill of Rights matter.

Here is the text of the 4th Amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Bill of Rights is all that protects all of us from arbitrary tyranny where all our lives could be at stake, regardless of whether or not we make good choices in life. Law based in principle is all that protects us from the caprice of evil men and women. Children experimenting in drugs is bad, but it will not cause the downfall of the Republic. I do care if our government thinks it should take from us, examine us, follow us, all in the name of security, but eventually leading to the reality of control.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Is Stereotyping Bullying, too?



Happened to catch a segment on Headline News last night about Hollywood stars speakign out against bullying. Now as we are all aware, according to the media, this all started being a major issue about six months ago. Also it, again according to the created cultural perception, almost always involves football players of linebacker size or larger shoving and belittling one of the few outrageously flamboyant boys in school.

At least that is what I caught from the clips of a few anti-bullying movies shown during the report. Something about a letterman's jacket just seems to make people want to shove around theater students in bow ties.

Horsecrap.

This is not isolated. Popular culture producers have often depicted the big, bad, violent, over testosteroned football player as the ideal image of a bully. Basketball, wrestling, and baseball are less targeted. But is this accurate?

Just speaking anecdotally, I've played, coached, or otherwise been around football players and other athletes all of my life. They are no more likely to bully a kid than anyone else. As a matter of fact, they have more of their time consumed and have a lot more to lose by engaging in such behavior. As a matter of fact, again, anecdotally speaking, football players will at times find themselves the target of bullying. This happens often to the kids that play the line, because usually they are a lot larger than the other kids, but are reluctant to get physical against smaller children for fear of being accused of bullying.

Is bullying a bad thing? Absolutely. But let us stop the harmful and inaccurate stereotyping of athletes as perpetual malefactors in these cases.

As far as bullying itself is concerned, in most situations things improve when the individual recognizes that he is the only one truly interested in his or her own security. My opinion, encourage kids to fight back on their own or in groups. Bullies are cowards. They will just move on.

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Shelley Moore Capito Selected For GOP Transition Team


Nov 08 2010
Capito Selected To Serve On GOP Transition Team
Today, Congressman Greg Walden R-OR, Chairman of the House GOP Majority Transition Team, announced the 21 Members responsible for overseeing the smooth and transparent transition into Republican majority.
Capito, who was elected to her sixth term in Congress last week, accepted the appointment with enthusiasm. “I am honored to be a part of the majority transition team as we seek to implement the first stages of an agenda aimed at listening and engaging the American people,” she stated.
In an earlier release, Walden stated that, “our transition team includes proven leaders who will meet our challenge to restore the House of Representatives as a great deliberative body that respects the will of the American people.” Members of this team will work to implement the congressional reforms included in the Pledge to America and look at additional ways to make Congress more transparent, cost-efficient, and accountable to the people.
To continue to engage Americans directly by seeking their input on themes like how Congress can operate with greater transparency and accountability to the people, the transition team has launched a new website at GOPLeader.gov/NewMajority. Americans are able to submit comments, videos and share information via Twitter and Facebook.
“I encourage West Virginians to take advantage of this unique opportunity to share their thoughts and concerns on how we can make Washington work better. I think we will see that transparency and citizen engagement will be tenets of the Republican Majority,” concluded Capito.
Members of the GOP Majority Transition Team
Rep. Rob Bishop (UT-1)
Rep. John Campbell (CA-48)
Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (WV-2)
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (UT-3)
Rep. Tom Cole (OK-4)
Rep. Mike Conaway (TX-11)
Rep. David Dreier (CA-26)
Rep.-elect Cory Gardner (CO-4)
Rep. Bob Goodlatte (VA-6)
Rep. Doc Hastings (WA-4)
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (TX-5)
Rep. Jim Jordan (OH-4)
Rep.-elect Adam Kinzinger (IL-11)
Rep. Buck McKeon (CA-25)
Rep. Candice Miller (MI-10)
Rep.-elect Martha Roby (AL-2)
Rep. Mike Rogers (MI-8)
Rep. Paul Ryan (WI-1)
Rep.-elect Tim Scott (SC-1)
Rep. Pete Sessions (TX-32)
Rep. Pat Tiberi (OH-12)

Monday, November 8, 2010

What's the Big Deal About India?

Obama's current vacation to India, a trip that involves almost twice as many planes as the entire (and nearby) Nepal Air Force, has been roundly criticized for its cost of $200 million per day. This figure, given by an Indian political figure, is in dispute by the White House, but they refuse to admit the price tag.
This may cause people to question why the trip to India is necessary.
Objectively speaking, it is. Of course you do not need thousands of people, the entire structure of the ritziest hotel in the region, forty planes, thirty-four naval vessels, and a partridge in a pear tree. Obama's huge entourage is very reminiscent of the old Mughal princes or the airs put on by British leaders of the Raj such as Admiral Lord Mountbatten. It is meant to show an imperial style more so than one of a republic. However, the trip is worthwhile, if approached correctly.
According to the CIA World Factbook, India occupies the most strategic point in southern Asia and the Indian Ocean. The country borders China's southwest and has skirmished with that country in the recent past. It has substantial mineral wealth, including the fourth largest coal reserves in the world. India also has a population of 1.1 billion. The country has nearly completed its transformation from an autarkic condition into a free market system. It has the 5th largest GDP in the world.
When looking at its economic might and the potential to someday become the strongest economy in the world, one has to take India into account as possibly the next great superpower. It also borders China, so if that country decides to get frisky, it can be a counterweight. Most importantly, India is a free market democracy in the old British tradition. It has the power to influence and guide events in its part of the world and deserves the opportunity to be encouraged to take a leading role. Getting India into the front rank of world affairs means that the United States can shift part of its leadership role to a country that shares our values and also has the capability of projective power and influence. A triad of the United States, United Kingdom, and India would be a powerful force for democracy and free markets in world affairs, if we can keep governments in all three focused on those priorities domestically as well.
So going to India is important. We must cement our relations with this country. It would not hurt for a group of Republicans to follow this up in a few months, obviously including Bobby Jindal. They can be a very important partner, or an insurmountable obstacle. We must deal with them carefully and respectfully.