.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bully Pulpit

The term "bully pulpit" stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. The Bully Pulpit features news, reasoned discourse, opinion and some humor.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Opponent of Black's questions donation

$4,000 check given to Decker after loss

By David Rice
WINSTON-SALEM JOURNAL

RALEIGH

Talk of political payoffs rippled through Raleigh again yesterday after a Democratic consultant who aims to dethrone House Speaker Jim Black questioned why Black gave $4,000 to former-legislator Michael Decker’s campaign this year, seven months after Decker lost a primary election.

Counties Burdened by Medicaid

Counties have no control over ever-increasing spending mandates

Carolina Journal


RALEIGH — North Carolina is the only state that requires counties to pay a fixed percentage of Medicaid costs, and a recently released study by the John Locke Foundation study shows how much the health-care program for the poor is burdening county budgets.

Wednesday Funnies...

David Letterman... "Top Signs There's Global Warming": I just bought ocean front property in Topeka, Kansas; Glaciers are receding faster than Letterman's hairline; "Cool Ranch" Doritos really "Lukewarm Ranch" Doritos; Ed Sullivan Theater is now a balmy 48 degrees; No shirt, no shoes? You still get service; Average temperatures have risen one degree over the last one hundred years—One degree! That's what this is all about?!

Jay Leno... It's TGIF. Do you know what that means? Thanksgiving is finished. ... Did anyone have one of these turduckens? Do you know about these? It's a turkey stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a chicken. That pretty much sounds like the bird flu trifecta! ... The Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade has a new slogan, "Incoming!" ... You probably heard this story—the M&M balloon in the Macy's parade struck a light post and was punctured, injuring some spectators. That's when you know you're in New York—even the balloons are mugging people. ... Al Gore said [recently] that global warming is more serious than terrorism. Unless the terrorist is on your plane, then that extra half a degree doesn't bother you so much. ... According to the Pentagon, Iraq detained 83,000 terror suspects, enough to fill a football stadium. You know what you call a football stadium filled with terrorists in this country? Oakland Raiders' games. ... Yellowstone National Park officials say the elk population has mysteriously dropped from 17,000 to 8,000 starting the very day they reintroduced wolves back into the park. What's the mystery there? Fat lazy elk and mean hungry wolves—what could possibly go wrong? ... John Kerry has been picked for jury duty. He was elected foreman. Well, after two weeks of campaigning and spending $12 million of his wife's money, he got it! ... Imagine John Kerry on [a] jury? How long are those deliberations going to take? I voted guilty before I voted not guilty.

RE: Bush and Politics, In That Order

Good question...

I thought so, yet you declined to answer it. You vented a lot of "shoulda, coulda, woulda," but offered no alternative. So I ask again, what's the alternative?

Is this the same libertarian 'I take care of me, you take care of you' Steve Brenneis that regularly posts on this board?

Indeed it is. A fundamental inability to understand causality on your part (I blame a liberal upbringing and public education) does not constitute inconsistency on my part.

What about all the other inevitable beheadings and other atrocities that are happening right now throughout the world, most notably in Africa? I know we didn't exactly cause those (we won't get into French and British colonialism here), but...

What about them? You answered the question as soon as you asked it, so why did you bother asking it? Once again, it's that causality thing.

As you've expressed before (in some way or another) we can't save those who can't figure out ways to save themselves.

Indeed we can't. However, we have an obligation to those on whom we have imposed ourselves. We invaded and occupied their country and assumed responsibility for the defense of innocents. As much as you and I might hate the reasons we did that, it is done and thumping our chests and whining about it solves nothing.

So we can have more of our native sons and daughters come home in body bags while fighting a pre-emptive, futile war that we began?

The futility of the action is debatable and there is not a single member of the military in Iraq who is there involuntarily. You can pretty much drop that line. That dog won't hunt.

Better yet, let’s just send them over to Iraq to finish the ‘Strategy For Victory.’

Very good idea. To bad the political elite is far more adept at feeding the cannons than they are at firing them.

Bush and Politics, In That Order

So what's the alternative? Cut and run?

Good question... One we should've thought about before running in there with itchy trigger fingers and a flag-waving ‘get ‘em back’ mentality. We gave absolutely no thought to the war's possible outcomes and to the additional unrest such pre-emptive actions would invite to the region.

Would you really doom all those people to the beheadings and results of Sharia that are inevitable?

Is this the same libertarian 'I take care of me, you take care of you' Steve Brenneis that regularly posts on this board? What about all the other inevitable beheadings and other atrocities that are happening right now throughout the world, most notably in Africa? I know we didn’t exactly cause those (we won’t get into French and British colonialism here), but...

As you've expressed before (in some way or another) we can't save those who can't figure out ways to save themselves. In the meantime, we're essentially over there beating a hornet's nest with a stick, and for what? So we can have more of our native sons and daughters come home in body bags while fighting a pre-emptive, futile war that we began? It's just crazy.

We are in Iraq for all the wrong reasons and we should never have gone there in the first place, just like in Viet Nam.

Word. The reason why we're in Iraq right now is the title of this post. Dubya really wanted to invade Iraq, so he gathered the most compelling evidence he could — no matter how questionable it's proven to be — and we did. Then nearly every politician, both Democrat and Republican, rallied behind him out of either blind loyalty and belief (which is at least respectable, I guess) or out of fear of being called names and/or for political reasons (which is most certainly not respectable).

It makes me so mad that I could spit nails. The whole lot of losers in Washington should be ousted for not doing any better than they have. Better yet, let’s just send them over to Iraq to finish the ‘Strategy For Victory.’

RE: Re: Lieberman: We Must Stay in Iraq

...long after everyone else in America has finally realized the futility of the situation.

So what's the alternative? Cut and run? Would you really doom all those people to the beheadings and results of Sharia that are inevitable? You weren't alive to remember it, but when we turned tail and ran from Viet Nam, it wasn't pretty. Every Viet Namese I work with (and that's not just a few) has at least one family member who spent years in the "re-education" camps. Most have multiple family members who did and almost all of them have at least one relative who died at the hands of the North Vietnamese Communists for no other reason than that they were South Viet Namese.

We are in Iraq for all the wrong reasons and we should never have gone there in the first place, just like in Viet Nam. However, we have made promises and created dependencies. If we bail out now, we doom hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people to violence at the hands of a few thousand nutcases. I don't like the fact that we are there and I despise the Bush Doctrine and everything it means, but to abandon these people now is nothing short of inhuman. If we did that, then everything our nation accomplished before or after would indeed be futile.

Tuition at ASU may rise 22%

While they're busy raising things, maybe they could raise admission standards 22%. All ASU students — both past and present — could benefit by increased academic 'equity' in their degrees. Of course, as long as more and more students are coming in to pay for all this incredible growth at ASU, that will never happen.

By Laura Giovanelli in today's Winston-Salem Journal:

ASU's $400 increase in tuition would go toward a 15 percent increase in faculty salaries, plus allocate more money for graduate-student assistants, and new programs in nursing, occupational therapy and professional sciences, said Greg Lovins, the associate vice chancellor for administration. A portion of the tuition increase would offset the cost of the increase for students who get need-based financial aid.

Students will also pay a few hundred more dollars in activity, athletic, book-rental and transportation fees, and if they live on campus they'll pay more in room and board. The total price tag for an undergraduate, in-state student attending ASU next year could increase by $1,042, or about 13 percent, from $7,893 a year to $8,935.

...A petition is being passed around campus, urging administrators to consider other financing sources, said Jud Watkins, a junior and the student-government president. Yesterday, he suggested a special fundraising campaign to replace the tuition increase. "It's massive," Watkins said of the proposed increase. "It's not really an 'us vs. them' type of thing, but rather the Appalachian family as a whole needs to go after other funds and go after them a lot harder."

Watkins said he is concerned about middle-class families, in particular, because he thinks they will have to take out more money in loans to cover the increase. In 2004, 48 percent of students who graduated borrowed money.

Re: Lieberman: We Must Stay in Iraq

Of course, this is no surprise coming from Lieberman. He'll be gung-ho long after everyone else in America has finally realized the futility of the situation.

Tot's load lifted from shoulders – literally

Mercy Ships operates on boy considered a throwaway child

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com


In his short life, Momoh had never lived a day in a healthy body. The day her son was born, his mother, Mariatu, noticed a small boil about the size of a bead on the baby's back. She thought it was a rash and left it alone. By the next day, the boil had grown to the size of her fingertip.

N.C. one of first states to allow abortion

Procedure legalized in 1967; if Roe was overturned, push for changing law probable

By David Ingram
WINSTON-SALEM JOURNAL

RALEIGH


North Carolina didn't wait for Roe vs. Wade to begin allowing legal abortions.

Back in 1967, the state became one of the first in the nation to change its laws and allow women to end their pregnancies in certain cases. The circumstances were narrow at first, requiring women to show that the pregnancy threatened their life or health, that the child would be born with a defect, or that the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.

Offering Abortion, Rebirth

Yes, an Arkansas doctor says, he destroys life. But he believes the thousands of women who have relied on him have been 'born again.'

By Stephanie Simon
Los Angeles Times

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. —
Dr. William F. Harrison has forgotten how many children the woman had. He remembers she was poor and, most vividly, he remembers her response when a physician diagnosed her distended stomach as pregnancy.

"Oh, God, doctor," the woman said. "I was hoping it was cancer."

Parental Rights Versus Abortion 'Rights' to be Argued

By Jeff Johnson
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com) -
The U.S. Supreme Court will be asked Wednesday to decide under what circumstances an underage girl should be allowed to have an abortion without at least one of her parents or guardians being told in advance about the procedure.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Lieberman: We Must Stay in Iraq

"The Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood – unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn," the Connecticut Democrat writes in an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal.

Another look at Lieberman's comments from NewsMax.

Our Troops Must Stay

America can't abandon 27 million Iraqis to 10,000 terrorists.

BY JOE LIEBERMAN
Opinionjournal.com


I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

“A Lot of Noise”

From the Editors of National Review Online:

If Bush really wants to get serious about immigration enforcement, there are measures he could take today that would go a long way toward seeing that "America's immigration laws apply across all of America." For instance, the Social Security Administration could be instructed to reject fake or stolen Social Security numbers submitted by employers on behalf of new hires; or the Treasury Department could change its instructions to banks that currently permit them to accept Mexico's illegal-alien I.D. card for purposes of opening accounts. Such measures would make the U.S. a less-alluring destination for illegals but would require no new funding, no new legislation, and no new computer systems.

The president's belated support for more enforcement inspires little confidence in conservatives who fear a replay of 1986, when millions of illegal aliens were legalized in exchange for hollow promises of future enforcement. If the president wants to persuade Congress and the American people that this time will be different, he must provide actions rather than words, results rather than "noise."

Global Warming Overkill

by Patrick J. Michaels
Cato Institute


The best way to garner headlines in the global warming game is to generate scary scenarios. While many people view climate change as some esoteric concern of environmentalists, they still raise their eyebrows when they hear a phrase like "global warming deaths."

Monday, November 28, 2005

The Vietnamization of Iraq

By Jed Babbin
The American Spectator


As hard as it is to think of Ted Kennedy as a political visionary, his April 2004 statement that "Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam," was way before its time. In the last presidential election year Kennedy started down a path that would have been political suicide for Kerry. But Kerry's approach -- feigning support for real action against terrorism -- lost. The Dems will not make the same mistake in 2008. The architects of our defeat in Vietnam have dusted off their old plans and are adopting them to Iraq. They are working hard to make Kennedy's statement come true.

Dick Durbin's Senate

By Bob Novak
Townhall.com

WASHINGTON --
On Nov. 16, as Congress raced to adjourn for Thanksgiving, Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin found time to sit down with Republican political activist C. Boyden Gray. It was unpleasant for Gray, who followed with what looked like a pre-arranged letter of apology to the senator. After that, Durbin was reported to have lifted the "hold" blocking Gray's confirmation as U.S. ambassador to the European Union (EU).

Taking Charge

By The Prowler
The American Spectator


In the coming two weeks or so leading into Christmas recess, look for Republicans in both the House and the Senate to begin trying to set a course for a White House agenda for the new year.

Cunningham resigns after bribery plea

From Fox News:

SAN DIEGO — Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham resigned from Congress Monday after pleading guilty in a San Diego federal court to accepting bribes and violating tax laws in the sale of his home two years ago to a defense contractor.

The Mall Had Its Day; Now It's the Web's Turn

Back at Work, People Go Online and Shop

By Margaret Webb Pressler
Washington Post Staff Writer


Mary Moran, an executive assistant at a government commission, does it. Michael Sims, a commercial real estate broker, does it. So do U.S. Senate employee Beckie Whitehead, Catholic University student Daniela Manville and lawyer David Godschalk.

They all go shopping online while at work.

Paradox of the left

FROM THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE:

School fight should open progressives' eyes

In the never-ending debate over education reform, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's push to take over the struggling Los Angeles Unified School District is a wonderful development. The value and importance of Villaraigosa's newly launched crusade lies not just in his bold attempt to bring change to the nation's second-largest school district but in its potential to open the eyes of millions of progressive voters in California and beyond to the biggest obstacles facing schools.

One of the most well-received books on politics in recent years – Thomas Frank's "What's the Matter with Kansas?" – chronicled what Frank saw as the folly of working-class voters backing a Republican Party far more interested in tax cuts for the wealthy than helping the less affluent. The premise is certainly open to debate, but Frank's book inspired considerable introspection on the right over the divergent agendas of the GOP's social conservative, business and libertarian wings.

What the left desperately needs is a book – it might be titled "What's the Matter with Manhattan?" – that would inspire a similar discussion among Democrats. It would chronicle the folly of liberals – at least those who worry deeply about the disadvantaged – voting for a Democratic Party far more interested in securing teachers union support than helping poor, often minority students.

Wake up and listen to the muezzin

Meanwhile, how are things looking in the United States? As you'll recall, in a typically "pig-headed and blinkered" (Independent) act that could lead to the entire planet becoming "uninhabitable" (Michael Meacher), "Polluter Bush" (Daily Express), "this ignorant, short-sighted and blinkered politician" (Friends of the Earth), rejected the Kyoto treaty. Yet somehow the "Toxic Texan" (everybody) has managed to outperform Canada on almost every measure of eco-virtue.

How did that happen?

Actually, it's not difficult. Signing Kyoto is nothing to do with reducing "global warming" so much as advertising one's transnational moral virtue. America could reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by 87 per cent and Canada could increase them by 673 per cent and the latter would still be a "good citizen of the world" (in the Prime Minister's phrase) while "Polluter Bush" would still be in the dog house, albeit a solar-powered one.


Mark Steyn

RE: Okay, just one response on a BP Wal-Mart story...

Look, there just isn't enough room in retail sales to properly absorb all the former manufacturing employees who have lost their jobs to overseas outsourcing. I guess you're fine for all those folks to work for the 'company store'? And simply lowering taxes isn't enough to solve this problem. I don't care how much you cut taxes in this country, manufacturing jobs in China are never coming back to the US as long as American businessmen pay Chinese folks pennies to do what Americans need dollars to do in order to feed their families and enjoy life.

What are you responding to? Obviously not the story on Wal-Mart. The issue is politicians knee-jerking to whichever corporate entity liberals happen to be demonizing at the moment.

This is why I say you just don't get it. It's not about Wal-Mart. It could be Lowe's, Target, K-Mart, Home Depot, or any of the other big box stores. If not them it's Halliburton or Chevron or any other successful corporate giant. In yet another amazing feat of ignoring evidence, liberals choose to berate Wal-Mart for substandard wages and unethical business practices. Typical of liberals, the actual evidence and attendant facts are completely ignored.

But to your response: Look to the root causes of why those jobs are leaving the US. Pull back the covers and you'll find the swarm of Marxists, statists, and other liberals whose utterly failed policies, regulations, and outright blackmail have brought us to the point that corporations will seek out a labor force that thinks $20 a day is fabulous wealth, regardless of how substandard the workforce might be.

You're partially right: as long as the left controls the political spectrum in the US, those jobs won't be back.

Strother Gets It, or Does He?

BTW, I remember you caring about what some rapper thinks of George Bush (positive or negative) a few weeks back when Kanye West offered that the president 'doesn't care about black people.' You called him a racist. That seems like some level of concern to me.

I guess that's where you fall short in understanding. It comes from assumptions you make regarding what I think of George Bush. If you re-read what I wrote at the time, you'll see that I was noting the irony of this racist piece of garbage (West) getting a pass on his hateful remarks. It has nothing to do with what Kanye thinks of George Bush, it has everything to do with a leftist media that attempts to control reality through a double standard they don't even try to camouflage any more.

And what does that make 50 Cent? A patriot? A Republican? A neo-con? Just wondering.

Nope, it just makes him yet another semi-articulate moron who is under the mistaken impression that he has anything of value to offer the universe. In other words, it makes him just another copy of Kanye West.

What? Abortion is wrong, Cindy Sheehan is crazy, Bill Clinton lied, and Wal-Mart is better than charity? Okay, we got it already!

You hear, but you don't comprehend.

Okay, just one response on a BP Wal-Mart story...

Steve says: I think Wal-Mart should install liberal detectors in its stores. They should then charge all liberals double whatever the advertised prices happen to be.

That's fine, but to keep my kind out for good, install a 'Moderate' detector. That'll definitely keep me from going there to buy things that used to be made in America for their everyday low prices. I rarely go there anyway — maybe 2-3 times a year — just because I can't stand the parking situation, massive crowds, maze of crap that I or no one with any sense of controlled spending habits need, etc. I don't like the mall very much, either.

From the article:The eventual result will be higher prices, tighter family budgets, and fewer jobs. The cultural elitists might feel satisfaction, but America will be the poorer.

From Steve: Thanks, liberals. What would we do without you? Oh, I know: better.

Look, there just isn't enough room in retail sales to properly absorb all the former manufacturing employees who have lost their jobs to overseas outsourcing. I guess you're fine for all those folks to work for the 'company store'? And simply lowering taxes isn't enough to solve this problem. I don't care how much you cut taxes in this country, manufacturing jobs in China are never coming back to the US as long as American businessmen pay Chinese folks pennies to do what Americans need dollars to do in order to feed their families and enjoy life.

"Moderate" is all relative

I guess you are moderate compared to all your tree-hugging, hippy friends!

RE: RE: Just An Observation

Oh Steve, I knew that would get you in the game.

Keeping in mind that I couldn't care less what some rapper thinks of George Bush (positive or negative) or what the latest Hollyweird or Rock'n'Roll airhead has decided is the number one just cause, I'm up for a discussion of anything current or past.

Oh, you must be referring to the Dubya: 'Incredible... A Gangsta,' Says 50 Cent story I just posted. What, you don't get all your crucial world news from MTVNews.com as I do?

BTW, I remember you caring about what some rapper thinks of George Bush (positive or negative) a few weeks back when Kanye West offered that the president 'doesn't care about black people.' You called him a racist. That seems like some level of concern to me. And what does that make 50 Cent? A patriot? A Republican? A neo-con? Just wondering.

Steve on abortion, Cindy Sheehan, Bill Clinton, and Wal-Mart: We just keep repeating those topics a lot because it takes a little longer for the subject matter to penetrate the liberal haze (if it ever does).

What? Abortion is wrong, Cindy Sheehan is crazy, Bill Clinton lied, and Wal-Mart is better than charity? Okay, we got it already!

Moderate. Uh huh.

Yeah. Right.

Ha-ha. Ha-ha-ha-ha. Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-hah.


Hey, what are you laughing at? I am a moderate. Just ask all my friends!

Try These, Strother

Here are a few quotes from Thomas Sowell. There might be some discussion fodder in them.

I am so old that I can remember when we called illegal aliens illegal aliens, when people paid their own medical bills, and when New Yorker cartoons were funny.

It is fascinating to watch politicians come up with "solutions" to problems that are a direct result of their previous solutions. In many cases, the most efficient thing to do would be to repeal their previous solution and stop being so gung-ho for creating new solutions in the future. But, politically, that is the last thing they will do.

If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as we wish. That is why Utopian planners end up as despots, whether at the national level or at the level of the local "redevelopment" agency.

Why are we spending the taxpayers' money to allow ex-Presidents to build monuments to themselves? Whatever the historical value of material stored in Presidential Libraries, that same material can be stored in the National Archives, so that people doing research on former Presidents can go to one place, instead of having to run all over the country.

People who believe in judicial activism often cite "good" policies imposed by judges and "bad" policies created by elected officials. But you could just as easily cite the reverse. It was the Supreme Court which enhanced the rights of slaveowners in the Dred Scott case and it was elected officials -- the President and Congress -- who abolished slavery.

If we become a people who are willing to give up our money and our freedom in exchange for rhetoric and promises, then nothing can save us.

It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them. Using this kind of reasoning, you can believe or not believe anything about anything, without having to bother to deal with facts or logic.

RE: Just An Observation

Keeping in mind that I couldn't care less what some rapper thinks of George Bush (positive or negative) or what the latest Hollyweird or Rock'n'Roll airhead has decided is the number one just cause, I'm up for a discussion of anything current or past.

Is there anything you guys would like to discuss rather than well-worn topics such as abortion, Cindy Sheehan, Bill Clinton, and Wal-Mart?

We just keep repeating those topics a lot because it takes a little longer for the subject matter to penetrate the liberal haze (if it ever does).

..just an observation from the resident "Moderate."

Moderate. Uh huh.

Yeah. Right.

Ha-ha. Ha-ha-ha-ha. Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-hah.

Dubya: 'Incredible... A Gangsta,' Says 50 Cent

Hey, I always knew Dubya was a gangsta. This is not really news, you know.

From MTVNews.com, originally reported in GQ:

50 Cent and Kanye West are the only ones selected to be GQ's "Men of the Year" who have no false modesty about it — both of the hip-hop stars justify their big egos in the mag's pages. But they also have more on their mind than just themselves. Like George W. Bush, for one. 50 thinks the president is "incredible ... a gangsta." "I wanna meet George Bush, just shake his hand and tell him how much of me I see in him," 50 told GQ. If the rapper's felony conviction didn't prevent him from voting, 50 said he would have voted for Bush.

Just An Observation

Usually when I sign on to the BP on a Monday morning, I see a collection of happenings from the news over the weekend worthy of discussion...

Andy and Steve: Is there anything you guys would like to discuss rather than well-worn topics such as abortion, Cindy Sheehan, Bill Clinton, and Wal-Mart? Correct me if I’m off track here, but are there fewer topics to offer for discussion considering the current state of Republican politics; the Iraq War; Dubya, Cheney, and Friends; etc.?

...just an observation from the resident "Moderate."

;)

Fifty babies a year are alive after abortion

Its guidelines say that babies aborted after more than 21 weeks and six days of gestation should have their hearts stopped by an injection of potassium chloride before being delivered. In practice, few doctors are willing or able to perform the delicate procedure.

Lois Rogers

In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

Matthew 2:18

Please buy my book...


© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

While book-signings for political figures like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity often feature long lines and people waiting for hours, the scene at Cindy Sheehan's book-signing yesterday near President Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch was a much more lonely affair.

Sunday, November 27, 2005

TV review: Mythbusters

by Gene Edward Veith
World Magazine


In a culture that treats truth as relative, Mythbusters (Discovery Network) is a breath of fresh air. The show's affable crew of experts and handymen takes urban legends—those "true stories" that circulate from person to person—and puts them to the test.
Yours truly opines: This is my favorite show on TV. I watch it every Wednesday night at 9:00 PM. I recommend it... :-)

Federalism May Offer Abortion Solution

By Radley Balko
Fox News


When the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito begin in January, much of the debate will focus on the issue of abortion.

Alito has been nominated to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, one of the six justices who reliably voted to uphold Roe v. Wade. It's unfortunate that abortion will dominate so much of the discussion about Alito. It's unlikely that a case offering the opportunity to undo Roe will come before the Supreme Court any time soon, and even if it should, Alito's confirmation would put the unofficial Supreme Court abortion scorecard at 5-4, enough to keep Roe intact. The abortion debate obscures more pressing issues far more likely to come before the Court.

Nevertheless, because abortion will be front and center, I'd like to offer an approach to the issue that will probably elicit reservations on both sides of the debate, but one I think is fair, grounded in the reality of contemporary politics and, most importantly, loyal to the Constitution.

Friday, November 25, 2005

New idea for Abortion Party: Aid the enemy

By Ann Coulter
Townhall.com


What is known as a "hawk" in today's Democratic Party looks at what our military has accomplished and – during the war, while our troops are in harm's way – demands that we withdraw our troops. ... It is simply a fact that Democrats like Murtha are encouraging the Iraqi insurgents when they say the war is going badly and it's time to bring the troops home. Whether or not there is any merit to the idea, calling for a troop withdrawal – or "redeployment," as liberals pointlessly distinguish – will delay our inevitable victory and cost more American lives. ... The Democrats are giving aid and comfort to the enemy for no purpose other than giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There is no plausible explanation for the Democrats' behavior other than that they long to see U.S. troops shot, humiliated, and driven from the field of battle. They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors.

In Disservice to America

By Lisa Fabrizio
The American Spectator


William Jefferson Clinton has been on the receiving end of more magnanimity from George W. Bush than he has any reasonable right to expect. Ignoring the history of insults and slights his family has suffered at the hands of his predecessor, President Bush has repaid this ill-treatment with a large dose of Christian charity.

And what has the president received in return for this largesse? Much as he did when he was actively dodging the draft in the '60s, Bill Clinton has taken to traveling the world denouncing our country's military efforts, recently calling our handling of Iraq "a big mistake." Worse yet, his remarks were made mere miles away from where U.S. troops are fighting and dying in defense of liberty.
Yours truly opines: Clinton should be ashamed (and he would be ashamed if he had a conscience.) I guess if you're an ex-Democrat President like Clinton and Carter, that gives you the right to go around the world bashing our country... Nice going, guys.

Meet Mark Warner

By Shawn Macomber
The American Spectator

MANCHESTER, N.H. --
Were the 2008 New Hampshire Democratic primary to be decided with a laugh meter rather than counted ballots, soon-to-be ex-Governor of Virginia Mark Warner might have the whole thing tied up already.

After a short, inexplicable welcoming speech last Friday by Lou D'Allesandro, wherein the New Hampshire State Senator explained that holding the event in Manchester, the "Queen City," was appropriate since "there are more queens in front of me than I've ever seen before in my whole life" (one assumes this won't be the Democrats' strategy for reaching out to Red State voters in '06, but who knows?), Warner took the microphone in front of an impressive standing room only crowd of about 200 and broke out the funny.

N.M. Gov Admits He Wasn't Baseball Pick

From Breitbart.com:

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.

Gov. Bill Richardson is coming clean on his draft record _ the baseball draft, that is, admitting that his claim to have been a pick of the Kansas City A's in 1966 was untrue.

Wal-Mart Critics Have Clashing Objectives

By Randy Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor

(CNSNews.com) -
While one of Wal-Mart's critics is calling for people to buy nothing from the world's biggest retailer on the day after Thanksgiving, another critic hopes shoppers will flood the stores on "Black Friday" so that they can receive parking lot flyers criticizing Wal-Mart's pricing practices.
Yours truly opines: If these liberals and other far-left groups would use the same amount of energy on the "War on Terror" as they do on the "War on Wal-Mart" or the "War on Capitalism," this world would be a much safer place. :-)

RE: A Discount Cornucopia of Gratitude

I think Wal-Mart should install liberal detectors in its stores. They should then charge all liberals double whatever the advertised prices happen to be.

Carrie Lukas wrote:

Global Insights found that Wal-Mart's expansion between 1985 and 2004 was associated with a 9.1 percent drop in the price of food at home, a 4.2 percent decline in the price of other commodities and goods, and a 3.1 percent decline in consumer prices overall, as measured by the consumer price index. As a result, Wal-Mart saves the average working family about $2,329 per year.
Of course since liberals and their warped view of reality are completely immune to evidence, this will go completely unnoticed.

Bears repeating:

The eventual result will be higher prices, tighter family budgets, and fewer jobs. The cultural elitists might feel satisfaction, but America will be the poorer.
Thanks, liberals. What would we do without you? Oh, I know: better.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

And the Fair Land

From Opinionjournal.com:

Let's give thanks for America.

Anyone whose labors take him into the far reaches of the country, as ours lately have done, is bound to mark how the years have made the land grow fruitful.

This is indeed a big country, a rich country, in a way no array of figures can measure and so in a way past belief of those who have not seen it. Even those who journey through its Northeastern complex, into the Southern lands, across the central plains and to its Western slopes can only glimpse a measure of the bounty of America.

And a traveler cannot but be struck on his journey by the thought that this country, one day, can be even greater. America, though many know it not, is one of the great underdeveloped countries of the world; what it reaches for exceeds by far what it has grasped.

So the visitor returns thankful for much of what he has seen, and, in spite of everything, an optimist about what his country might be...

Ben Franklin's Politically Incorrect Thanksgiving

From Human Events Online:

Did you know that the day we celebrate as Thanksgiving was supposed to be a fast?

It took one politically incorrect farmer to change the course of history. When the government tried to impose a fast, he called for a grand feast—thanksgivings—so that Americans could celebrate their bounty and nourish their bodies, not lament their hardships through hunger.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

GM's Woes Are Homemade, Not Imported

by Daniel T. Griswold
Cato Institute


If General Motors itself were one big car, its “check engine” light would be flashing. The world’s largest car maker announced this week that it plans to shed 30,000 workers by 2008 as its market share and stock price continue to slide against a backdrop of unsustainable labor costs.

SCALIA GIVES FRANKEN SOME AIR

From the NY Post:

AL Franken, the former "Saturday Night Live" star, found out the hard way not to mess with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who chided Franken as if he were a delinquent schoolboy at Time Warner Center on Monday night.

A Discount Cornucopia of Gratitude

Giving thanks for Wal-Mart.

By Carrie Lukas

National Review Online

"Black Friday," the first day of the holiday shopping season, will soon be upon us. Crazed bargain hunters will line up at 2:00 A.M. for the chance at a $10 DVD player or a free (after rebate) pack of printer paper — anything retailers think will get shoppers through the door. This consumer frenzy will be accompanied by reports of unruly shoppers pushing and shoving each other to grab limited deals, followed by earnest pundits debating whether capitalism has gone too far.

Wal-Mart and its price-cutting smiley face will be at the center of this debate. To the anti-corporate Left, Wal-Mart represents everything wrong with America.

Pre-emptive strike: 'Fragging prof' quits

College teacher suggested soldiers in Iraq should kill superior officers

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com


The professor who gained national attention for suggesting U.S. soldiers in Iraq kill their superior officers has resigned his teaching post at a New Jersey college, moments before school officials were slated to decide his fate.

Dems Promise Iraq Policy 'At the Right Time'

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor

(CNSNews.com) -
Congressional Democrats promise that when Congress returns from its Thanksgiving recess, "the fight for the direction of the country we love will begin anew." But as the year draws to a close, Republicans are criticizing Democrats for refusing to clarify their policy on Iraq.

In a Thanksgiving message to supporters, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee said it will work hard in the months ahead to correct the "obscene priorities" of Republicans, including tax cuts.

GOP officials: Defeat Richard Morgan (Some say leader has betrayed his own party)

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

RALEIGH


Republican Party officials say they will cast aside a tradition of not picking favorites in primaries and use their influence to try to beat state Rep. Richard Morgan, R-Moore.

Morgan is a target of the party leadership because he has participated in power sharing with Democrats in the N.C. House.

Many GOP members have criticized Morgan for striking deals that made him co-speaker in 2003 and speaker pro tempore in 2005.

Over the weekend, the state Republican Party's executive committee approved a resolution urging voters in Morgan's district to pick someone other than Morgan in next May's primary. The resolution also gives state GOP chairman Ferrell Blount the authority to lend "aid and support" to Morgan's primary opponents.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Desperate for Defeat


By George Neumayr
The American Spectator


The foreign policy of the Democratic Party verges on deliberate defeatism: afraid of American "dominance" in the world, many Democrats would prefer that America tie wars than win them. Because they would like to see America put in its place -- this isn't an overstatement; just listen to the Democrats' constant complaints about America's lone "superpower" status -- their contribution to the war effort is defined by deep ambivalence. They don't necessarily want their country to lose, but they are not so sure if they want it to win either. They often define this ambivalence as "patriotism": we're henpecking and sapping American military morale for the country's own good, they'll say, lest it become too "arrogant."

Friendly Fire (John Murtha unites the Republicans.)

BY BRENDAN MINITER
OpinionJournal.com


Shortly after stepping off a plane at Dulles Airport last week, Rep. Duncan Hunter was on a cell phone delivering a surprisingly stern message to a few reporters. Coverage of the debate in the Senate to "ban" the use of torture, the Armed Services Committee chairman said, was inaccurate and unfair.

Mr. Hunter's beef was that it is already illegal for any American to torture someone overseas and such a crime is punishable of up to 20 years in prison, or execution if the torture victim dies. To underscore his point, Mr. Hunter followed up on Tuesday with a press release noting that "contrary to widespread media reports, torture is [already] banned under American criminal laws." The release included copies of the applicable criminal code.

Last word on the coast...

As I said before, the actual better solution is for state and federal governments to stop subsidizing development on the coast with disaster aid and insurance bailouts.
Actually Steve, this is what I'd been saying all along. My thought was that if vacation property was no longer insured the demand for these multi-million dollar homes would drop drastically and developers would look elsewhere. It's a win-win for everyone; the home-owners, the builders and the environment.

RE: Re: More Hatteras Village

So for Hatteras Village, creating more government via incorporation is the answer?
Ideally, local government is the only government that should exist. As Nick responded:

I cannot speak for Steve, but what my initial post was saying is that currently all major decisions regarding zoning is being made by a government more than an hour away. Most of the elected officials and all of the staff decision makers are from Manteo. I know because I once worked for Dare Planning. If they incorporate, decisions will be made by the local people. It may not seem like it, but there is a big difference between Manteo and Hatteras. The local people know this and some realize they essentially have little say in gov issues, but many are hung up on the "evils" of municipal government. However if they structure it themselves, they can have regulations conducive to their ideals and ways of life.
Government is not a quantity, so "more government" is disingenuous (yes, I know, all sides of the political spectrum use the term). The problem with government and its size is in the application. If Hatteras Village incorporates in order to take their destiny into their own hands, that is far more preferable than the solution that Behethland was sneaking up on, but would never admit to: state or federal regulation of development.

Municipal government and its cousin zoning are not intrinsically evil (unlike national government or even state government). What makes a municipal government evil is when it seeks to grow itself into benevolence. The ordinary functions of small government are most efficiently demonstrated in localities: pick up the trash, provide fire protection, limited zoning.

As I said before, the actual better solution is for state and federal governments to stop subsidizing development on the coast with disaster aid and insurance bailouts. If Dixon and Hoyle were faced with subsidizing some very expensive insurance themselves, the profitability of the project would probably decline to the point that they would have looked somewhere else. That's the market solution. Unfortunately, Hatteras Village will be unlikely to wait around for state and federal government to become enlightened to the market solution, so the next best solution is to incorporate and take matters into their own hands. The difference between a statist and a libertarian is that the libertarian will look for the market solution first and the government solution second while the statist looks only for the government solution.

Re: More Hatteras Village

The best solution is always for members of a locality to join together and decide their own fate.
So for Hatteras Village, creating more government via incorporation is the answer? I don't disagree — I'm just making sure that I understand you correctly.

More Hatteras Village

Nick B offers:

The solution to this problem is the incorporation of the village. As stated in the article, the village finally has an adequate tax base to support itself. All planning and zoning decisions for tis people are currently made by the county government in Manteo (roughly 1 hour north). Citizens obviously do have a say in these matters, but do not ultimately have the power that they could in determining the outcomes. Currently, Hatteras Island as a whole only has one elected official (a county commissioner)who even represents them in the county government. And in my opinion, our representatives in the past have been too concerned with their own personal wealth to put much effort in to supporting the cause of a small part of their constituency.

Incorporation in the past has been a hot button issue in this village because of zoning issues and the prospects of higher taxes. However, if the local people structure a municipal government around their ideals and visions, the regulations do not have to be oppressive on the native people. An elected board of native peoples could and should be tolerant to the culture and lifestyles of their own people.

It is too late to stop the Slash Creek development. It's already well under way. Regulations have been passed in the county to stop similar developments from occuring in Hatteras Village, but the islanders still need to have vision and realize that something else could come along that they are strongly opposed to and they still would have little say with the outcome. The island people's destiny is in their own hands, but if they keep fighting over whether they should incorporate, decisions will continue to be made for them.

One last thing, I myself had less opposition to Dixon's development than some. With that being said, I felt like he handled himself very unprofessionally in this piece. I realize that some heated exchanges between the developers and locals occured, but his comments were quite asinine. If he hopes to sucessfully develop on Hatteras Island, I'd hope that his attitude changes. Islanders are a tight knit bunch, and that could have sealed his developing fate on that end of the Outer Banks.
Well said, Nick. The best solution is always for members of a locality to join together and decide their own fate. Too bad it didn't happen before all the uproar. Unfortunately, government has always been a defensive measure. It would be nice if people behaved themselves without it, but as I said before, if wishes were horses, then beggars would ride.

RE: Poor Bruce

Bears repeating:

As Laura Ingraham says, "Bruce, just shut up and sing."

Poor Bruce

Hey, I'm far from pissed about this. I think it's hilarious! 'Screw the Boss, but Clay Aiken's where it's at! I love me some American Idol!' It's a good thing that 'liberals' run the entertainment business. What would we do otherwise? It's a scary thought.

Your classification of Springsteen as an "American icon" is highly subjective at best. All his best work was twenty years ago.

Hmm, how to respond... How about 'Don't think so' and 'Wrong'?

Sprinsteen didn't just endorse and campaign. He was involved in some of the worst of the hate America, hate Bush rhetoric before during and after the campaign. Congress has no business honoring someone who spews that kind of venom.

Really? 'Hate America,' you say? Got some quotes from Springsteen to back up those mighty inflammatory accusations, Mr. Dramatic?

To be serious for a moment, I'm pretty sure that Bruce isn't losing any sleep over this. Sorta like Mel Gibson probably didn't lose any sleep over his Democrat-led 'snub' (which I'd like to see some proof of as well... I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I just don't remember that one).

By the way, anybody know why the NC Republican Party would choose Clay Aiken for their ticket raffle? Are 'Claymates' generally Republicans? By the way, before being an overnight sensation on TV, Mr. Aiken was a teacher at one of those evil old government run schools. Considering that he's a registered Democrat, he's obviously been brainwashed by his liberal environment and hardly worthy of a Republican endorsement.

Breathe, Strother, Count to Ten

Relax, Strother, no one but you and John Corzine seem to be getting pissed off. Your classification of Springsteen as an "American icon" is highly subjective at best. All his best work was twenty years ago. And the Republicans aren't doing anything different than the Democrats have done. I seem to recall a resolution coming up in the Congress during the Clinton Administration honoring Mel Gibson. The Democrat leadership shot it down because Gibson is right of center.

I did find this kind of amusing:

Springsteen endorsed Kerry last year, and made campaign appearances that drew huge crowds who came to hear music described in the resolution as "a cultural milestone that has touched the lives of millions of people."

Way to soft-pedal it, Donna. Sprinsteen didn't just endorse and campaign. He was involved in some of the worst of the hate America, hate Bush rhetoric before during and after the campaign. Congress has no business honoring someone who spews that kind of venom.

As Laura Ingraham says, "Bruce, just shut up and sing."

Re: Republicans refuse to give Bruce Springsteen his glory days

Meanwhile — according to the Fayetteville Times — the N.C. Republican Party is raising money by auctioning off tickets to Clay Aiken's Dec. 22 concert in Raleigh. Aiken is a Democrat, says the N.C. Democratic Party, citing his registration information on the state Board of Elections Web site.

Nice going, Republicans. Blackball Bruce Springsteen — a true American icon — and fundraise via Clay Aiken, an 'American Idol' who's a Democrat at that. What, Ted Nugent (the Republican musician) isn't touring?

Getting pissed off at musicians for being 'liberals' is like getting pissed off at Baptist ministers for being 'conservatives.'

Remembering the Gipper


"We must never forget that no government schemes are going to perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what philosophers would call the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the doctrine of sin. There is sin and evil in the world, and we're enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might."

Ronald Reagan

Republicans refuse to give Bruce Springsteen his glory days

By DONNA DE LA CRUZ
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON --
Bruce Springsteen famously was "born in the USA," but he's getting scorned in the U.S. Senate.

An effort by New Jersey's two Democratic senators to honor the veteran rocker was shot down Friday by Republicans who are apparently still miffed a year after the Boss lent his voice to the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

HOW TO LOSE A WAR

By RALPH PETERS
NY Post

November 21, 2005 -- QUIT.
It's that simple. There are plenty of more complex ways to lose a war, but none as reliable as just giving up.

Increasingly, quitting looks like the new American Way of War. No matter how great your team, you can't win the game if you walk off the field at half-time. That's precisely what the Democratic Party wants America to do in Iraq. Forget the fact that we've made remarkable progress under daunting conditions: The Dems are looking to throw the game just to embarrass the Bush administration.

Washington Retreat (Congress sends the wrong signal to the Iraqis.)

From OpinionJournal.com:

"We were not strong enough to drive out a half-million American troops, but that wasn't our aim. Our intention was to break the will of the American government to continue the war." -- North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap, in a 1990 interview with historian Stanley Karnow.


It's been a bad week for the American war effort, not in Iraq or anywhere else in the field but in Washington, D.C. The American Congress is sending increasingly loud signals of irresolution in Iraq, including panicky calls for withdrawal.

There are many lessons of the Vietnam War, but two of the biggest are these: Don't fight wars you don't intend to win, and while American troops can't be defeated, American politicians can be. Like General Giap, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his fellow terrorists understand the second lesson very well, and so his strategy has always been not to capture Baghdad but to inflict casualties in a way that breaks the will of American elites. He'll only be encouraged by this week's show of Beltway duck and cover.

There's little comfort in the fact that Senate Republicans stood up Monday to Democratic demands for a specific troop-withdrawal timetable. The GOP Senate leadership still put itself on record that it believes time is running short. No wonder Minority Leader Harry Reid is bragging of having "change[d] the policy of the United States with regard to Iraq."

The resolution--which passed 79-19--sounds innocuous enough: It calls for 2006 to be "a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."

Monday, November 21, 2005

RE: Coastal Woes? Move Inland!

Steve said: "The solution to that is simply for the government to close its purse. Given the nature of prevailing conditions on the outer banks, the best way I can think of to limit growth is for the government to stop subsidizing it. ... If you live on the coast and a hurricane or a flood wipes you out, tough bananas. Move inland."

Steve is exactly right... It's such a simple solution; that's why it will probably never happen.

Listen to the word on the 'Arab street'

Good luck, pal. I don't know what Islamist Suicide-Bombing For Dummies defines as a "soft target" but a Jordanian-Palestinian wedding in the public area of an hotel in a Muslim country with no infidel troops must come pretty close to the softest target of all time. Even more revealing, look at who Zarqawi dispatched to blow up his brother Muslims: why would he send Ali Hussein Ali al-Shamari, one of his most trusted lieutenants, to die in an operation requiring practically no skill?

Well, by definition it's hard to get suicide bombers with experience. But Mr Shamari's presence suggests at the very least that the "insurgency" is having a hard time meeting its recruitment targets. Though it's much admired in the salons of the West, armchair insurgents such as Michael Moore seem to have no desire to walk the walk. Mr Moore compared the Zarqawi crowd to the "Minutemen" of America's revolution, pledged to take to the field of battle at a minute's notice. Alas, the concept of self-destructing Minutemen depends on the often misplaced optimism of the London bus stop: there'll be another one along in a minute.


Mark Steyn

Coastal Woes? Move Inland!

So what is contridictory there?

Preserving it for what and from what? Assume you leave the pristine seashore areas designated and untouched. Eventually development will crowd right up to its very borders and you will have a small, artificial area surrounded by intense development. Think Yellowstone. Think what the Parkway will be like in 20 years. In actual fact, you will have preserved nothing. The hordes of tourists will tromp up and down the beaches, carting off sand, shells, and flora, just as they have worn pathways through the forests of Linville and the gorges of Yellowstone. Just the act of curtaining off the area makes it more desirable and creates demand for it.

The oxymoron occurs because eventually the borders of the National Seashore will be so densely developed, no one will have accommodations within miles of it and soon your children and grandchildren will lose interest altogether in fighting the hassle of getting there. You have preserved nothing for no one.

Are you pro-insurance premium hikes?

For the people who live on the coast? Absolutely. If you want to play, you gotta pay.

Do you enjoy paying for someone else's multi-million dollar vacation house that's floating in the ocean?

Absolutely not and I never implied it. But the solution to that is not to impose government sanctions on development. The solution to that is simply for the government to close its purse. Given the nature of prevailing conditions on the outer banks, the best way I can think of to limit growth is for the government to stop subsidizing it. Dissolve FEMA and change state laws. If you live on the coast and a hurricane or a flood wipes you out, tough bananas. Move inland. I'll bet you real money that the poor, benighted residents of Hatteras Village would burst a blood vessel if you suggested they would be on their own after the next hurricane or tropical storm left them underwater.

And you're still dodging the question. You still haven't offered up how you want to go about limiting development and solving the problem.

RE: Ron Carroll Sticks Out His Tongue

Matthew Tilley offers:

As a concerned Stokes County citizen it's this dirty insider politics that makes it difficult, if not impossible, for real people with a heart for the county and a real interest in good government to get elected. Those of us with real jobs who're working hard to raise a family just have to throw up our hands in disgust when no one seems to really be representing us at any level of govenment -- especially where'd you'd expect it most, at the most local level.

While I've met and actually like everyone of the current county commissioners, I'm not so sure they're all looking out for me. On the other hand, the way that Dr. Carroll is approaching things doesn't seem very productive at all. I'd prefer not being completely represented to the rancorous attitude on display here. Not sure that things are as black and white as he's making it out or as some of the folks on the other side are making it out.

Sure, I'm sounding pretty wishy-washy, but at the end of the day, we do all have to live here. How do you break the vicious petty cycle and move the county forward? And don't give me that get involved stuff -- that's just too hard! (yes, of course, I'm being sarcastic!)


I think that states it pretty well, actually.

One of the interesting aspects of county government is that it is portrayed as representative government and its artifacts as deliberative bodies (well, at least the Board of Commissioners are). The simple facts are that the list of things County Commissioners cannot do is far longer than the list of things they can do. There are 13 elected county-wide offices in Stokes County: Five commissioners, five LEA (school board) members, the sheriff, the clerk of the superior courts, and the register of deeds. We also elect member of the soil and water commission, but, as you'll see, that is a complete waste of time and money (the vote, not necessarily the position). Given the structure of county government, I can't think of a single reason to elect any of those positions. Electing the sheriff is a holdover from the antebellum county government structure. The sheriff is a law enforcement officer, he should be appointed by the highest elected officials overseeing county administration. The clerk of courts and register of deeds are clerical and administrative positions. In many cases, forcing elections for these offices just about guarantees you will not get the best person for the job. Stokes County is exceptional in that at the moment as both positions are held by highly competent administrators.

The LEA was created by the NC legislature to protect their little Marxist indoctrination centers against the ravages of both common sense and conservatism. In Stokes County, the LEA has learned from masters of deception like Ron Carroll and Frank Sells (well maybe I'm giving Frank too much credit) how to co-opt the commissioner elections as well. By hiding roughly 80% of their budget from the public, they create the perception that stingy commissioners are starving the schools. Electing the LEA is both a joke and a local government disaster. While some kind of citizen oversight of the schools is definitely a necessity, holding a beauty pageant every other year to determine the oversight creates a travesty of republican democracy.

That brings us to the commissioners. I am of two minds on this. From a strict policy point of view, I can see no problem with the board being appointed. The question arises, who will do the appointing? Constitutionally, counties are simply a political subdivision of the state government. Allowing the General Assembly to appoint commissioners is completely unworkable. This would vest total control over local government in the hands of two people: the House of Representatives member and the state Senator. The model for local government is intended that the County Manager serves as the executive while the Board of Commissioners serves as the legislative (if you will). The problem with that model is that it doesn't fit reality. The legislative powers of the BoC are minimal at best. A better model is the corporate one, with the County Manager as the CEO and the commissioners as the board of directors. If the office was apolitical and you could get the Democrats to drop their silly ideas of participatory democracy, the natural extension of the model is that the county shareholders (i.e. anyone who lives or owns property in the county) should elect the board of directors. In fact, the natural working model for this would be to limit election of the board to property owners only (something that was in the US Constitution and should be brought back, but I digress...).

Obviously, changing the system can't happen locally. That's why electing people to the NCGA who are solidly grounded in the principles of republican democracy is so important (republican, not Republican, don't start whining at me).

RE: Development

And I realize that by declaring a large part of the coast National Seashore, my options for accommodations will be limited. But we've got to make a hard choice: do we continue to build or do we preserve the land so that future generations will have someplace to go?

So what is contridictory there? Less development might mean driving a little further to sleep each night, but there would still be options. The National Seashore is very much like the Parkway. Limited development, but available to everyone. And there are plenty of houses on Hatteras already. Those places would be grandfathered in, but once they're gone they're not rebuilt.

I can't understand where you are coming from. Are you pro-insurance premium hikes? Do you enjoy paying for someone else's multi-million dollar vacation house that's floating in the ocean? What don't you get about the futility of this cycle we're in? Nature can repair herself when man doesn't get in the way.


RE: Development on the Coast

Yes, elitism:

By then, perhaps, Hatteras Village will have been transformed from a community of hardy and independent-minded souls into a high-density cluster of condominiums and palatial "rental machines" for vacationers, with few or no permanent residents, serviced by a small army of seasonal workers who will commute each night to apartments in some affordable gulag far away, invisible as the subterranean workers of Disney World.

"We were just living our lives, never realizing that something like this could happen to us," said Ricki Shepherd, who has run the Hatteras Harbor Seafood and Deli for the past two decades, and is current president of the Hatteras Civic Association ("Not a job coveted by anyone," Shepherd notes). "The development here has just been insane. As a community, the Slash Condos project has shown us the line that we have to draw if we are going to survive. This is the final line."

"I've got one woman down there, Jane Oden [of the Hattteras Civic Association], whose family owns three docks," said Dixon. "And she's fighting us over a little marina with a bunch of outboard boats. What can you say to that? We've got a federal agency saying that creek is manatee habitat. A manatee couldn't get up that creek if it was walking upright. Do you see how ridiculous this is?"

These people don't want the development because they are afraid of changes that will upset their little corner of heaven-on-earth. They are using the environmental concerns to win the sympathies of bleeding-heart environmentalists everywhere. The fact is that they lived in a virtual gated community and now Dixon and Hoyle are poised to bring in the rabble and they don't like it a bit.

And yes, these folks are about as native as you can get to the Outer Banks without being Croatan.

No one seems to be mentioning that the Croatans probably thought pretty much the same things. Nothing in this life is more constant than change.

And I realize that by declaring a large part of the coast National Seashore, my options for accommodations will be limited. But we've got to make a hard choice: do we continue to build or do we preserve the land so that future generations will have someplace to go?

I'm hoping that you will re-read what you wrote and realize that you committed an oxymoron.

And you're still dodging the question. You said:

...just suggesting that we control any future development.

Who is we? And what kind of controls are you suggesting?

Development on the Coast

There isn't an easy answer! These Hatteras folks screwed themselves by not having zoning laws prohibiting this sort of thing, but the reason they didn't have the zoning laws was to help out the local fishermen! Elitism?... I must have missed that part? These people just never dreamed someone would want to come in and bulldoze the live oaks and the marsh to build condos and vacation homes. So what if this guy built a fieldhouse for Myrtle Beach High School and donated a firetruck to Atlantic Beach? What good is that sort of thing going to do Hatteras Island if the whole place is under water?!! This isn't the same situation. The state of NC has got to make some rules about developing this fragile land and as the original article states, it isn't just areas on the Outer Banks that are in jeopardy. Topsail Island is almost gone.

And yes, these folks are about as native as you can get to the Outer Banks without being Croatan.

I love the Outer Banks. I love to vacation there. And I realize that by declaring a large part of the coast National Seashore, my options for accommodations will be limited. But we've got to make a hard choice: do we continue to build or do we preserve the land so that future generations will have someplace to go? The banks are designed to fluctuate. Man-made structures are interrupting that natural flow of sand and water. Btw, I'm not suggesting we do anything about what's already there; just suggesting that we control any future development.

RE: Sunset for Hatteras Village?

Once again, I hear a lot of whining and read a lot of bombastic language, but the whiners sure do seem to be short on solutions and suggestions.

As David Hoyle (a Democrat, by the way) says:

"Now they are using the environment as the issue to try and stop us, but everybody knows exactly what the issue really is. Ten years ago these same people said 'hell no' to zoning. They didn't want anybody telling them what to do with their property. They want to blame me for raping the place, for doing something bad, when the whole blame rests with them. I'm a private citizen, trying to make a living. I didn't take a vow of poverty when I signed on at the legislature. I put my occupation right down there. I'm proud of what I do."

The issue isn't greed or the environment or spoiling a unique community. The current residents are imports themselves, every one. The issue is who gets to do what and who gets to say who does what. Other than that, the whole article and the whole issue consists of a lot of people (except Dixon and Hoyle) standing around wishing. And if wishes were horses, then beggars would ride.

By the way, this doesn't sound much like greed to me:

"I've developed properties in Texas, in Atlantic Beach, North Carolina, all over. I've done this for 30 years and I've never had anything like this happen. And the funny thing is, we could have helped the Hatteras Civic Association. When we were building in Atlantic Beach, the town needed a fire truck, so we bought them one. We bought the fieldhouse for a high school in Myrtle Beach. But that's not going to happen here. The money that could have done something like that is going straight to our lawyers."

That sounds like a community-minded developer. This article pretty much convinces me that there is a healthy dose of elitism involved and any sympathy I might have had for the people of Hatteras Village has declined to just about nil.

Sunset for Hatteras Village?

Here is the article I was asking Strother about. Perfect example of greed and misplaced priorities:

Years from now, visitors may never know that Hatteras Village was once a strong, functioning town of working people, commercial fishermen and artists, storekeepers and doctors and boatbuilders. They may never know the rugged history of the place, or why, for centuries, the same families stayed on here, on this spectacularly exposed chain of sand islands--40 long, rough miles of saltwater between them and the protection and wealth of the North Carolina mainland. By then, perhaps, Hatteras Village will have been transformed from a community of hardy and independent-minded souls into a high-density cluster of condominiums and palatial "rental machines" for vacationers, with few or no permanent residents, serviced by a small army of seasonal workers who will commute each night to apartments in some affordable gulag far away, invisible as the subterranean workers of Disney World.

Conservatives in Hollywood?!

A long read, but well worth the time.

But a movie comes out of a worldview, and the Hollywood of Barbra Streisand, Rob Reiner, and Alec Baldwin may still not get it. Libertas’s Murty says that a publicist for Ridley Scott’s expensive 2005 flop about the Crusades, Kingdom of Heaven, asked her and her filmmaker husband, Jason Apuzzo, for advice on marketing the film to conservatives and Christians. Invited to a press screening along with representatives of various Christian groups, the two watched in disbelief as the movie opened with a Catholic priest beheading a woman and stealing her rosary—and went on in that vein, while also presenting the Muslims as noble and wise. “Every single person directly associated with the Church in the movie is a murderer or a liar. They really thought this would appeal to Christians,” Murty recounts. “Some of these people live in this completely sealed world in West Hollywood and didn’t register how offensive the movie would be.”

Brian C. Anderson

RE: Ron Carroll Sticks Out His Tongue

Robert adds:

20 Years of the Buster/Willis development cabal, your defeat, the election of Barry Lawson and others, the defeat of Graham Flynt (a once and a lifetime chance for extreme decency in the county) and you refer to Stokes voters as "sophisticated"? Steve, you're letting your guard down!

I guess I should clarify the sophistication part. There is a small cabal of people in Stokes County who believe they control the whole electoral process. They believe the petty details of everyday government are known and understood by a select few. In that they are correct. Where they miss the boat is in believing they control or even understand the electorate.

Poll ten people at the Lowe's Foods in King or ten people at the Food Lion in Walnut Cove. Nine of them couldn't tell you the names of any of their local elected officials. Seven of them couldn't tell you the name of their Congressman and five couldn't name both Senators. This is not a new situation. In the past, voting was controlled through contact with several large families in different parts of the county. There was a matrix of information and key people who actually did control the votes of tens and sometimes hundreds of people. Now, the matrix has gotten too large and the old families have been diluted. People vote more on issues than they did in the past. The vendettas that raged between families and factions in the county are small and largely unknown to the outsiders who have swelled the county's population.

Even if people actually read the Stokes County fishwrap, which they don't, the petty bickering that takes place on the editorial page, which is largely still an offshoot of those old family and factional alliances, won't win or lose a single vote.

On a cosmic scale, that's not really sophistication. But compared to old-style politics in Stokes County, it's positively cosmopolitan.

Congress Helps Self to $3,100 Pay Raise

Why doesn't this surprise me?

By David Espo for the AP:

WASHINGTON — The Republican-controlled Congress helped itself to a $3,100 pay raise on Friday, then postponed work on bills to curb spending on social programs and cut taxes in favor of a two-week vacation.

RE: OBX Talk

The locals don't want this, but they have no recourse because of their reluctance for zoning laws.

Then, apparently, the absence of zoning is more important to the locals than keeping "bigwigs" and their boats out.

So what is the point? You and Strother have both described the problem (as you see it), but neither of you has offered suggestions or solutions. You have both hinted broadly that someone or something should act, but you hesitate to be specific. Why is that?

Obviously, you think something should happen differently than is happening now. What is it you want to happen and how should it happen?

OBX Talk

The point is, OBX is being overdeveloped with vacation homes for Virginians while at the same time the native Bankers are being taken advantage of. Case in point: Hatteras Island. Hatteras Island consists of national seashore and local fisheries. The island has refrained from zoning laws because the people who actually live and make a living there don't want them. They want to be able to park a boat in the front yard and hang nets out to dry where they want to. Because of this lack of zoning law, some big wig developers have come on to the island and began buying up property to build multi-million dollar homes and condos. To make room, they are cutting down hundreds-of-years-old live oaks and filling in swamp area. Hatteras Island has a maritime forest (which is rare in itself) that houses species of plants and animals that have only been found on the banks! This forest is being cut into to make way for these huge houses. Say what you want, but those forests are what keep the banks in place. They are obviously part of an ecosystem that was been thriving for eons. We don't know what the environmental repercussions may be.

The locals don't want this, but they have no recourse because of their reluctance for zoning laws.

Strother, do you still have a copy of this article from a couple of years ago? It can explain it all much better than I can.

So Talk Already

Well, Strother, you managed to throw out a lot of generalities, but you didn't really say anything.

You said:

As a state, we owe it to our fishing industry to protect our own business owners and personal interests.

What does that mean? Do you want someone or something to do something? What do you want this someone or something to do? Who do you want doing it? The government? Elves?

Let's concern ourselves with the welfare of NC workers and native residents first.

Indeed, but how? Once again, you suggest a course of action, but you are woefully short on detail.

Ron Carroll Sticks Out His Tongue

So this is the editorial equivalent of Ronnie Carroll sticking out his tongue and saying "nanny nanny boo boo" to Dot Bennett. At the same time, he plays verbal "tag, you're it" with the Turpins. With mental giants like Ronnie-boy pursuing public office in Stokes County, we will have nothing to fear. There has always been a grade-school playground element to Stokes County politics. In general, the voters are usually sophisticated enough to reject it, but sometimes zeitgeist gets the best of them.

Sunday, November 20, 2005

Letters to the Editor (The Stokes News; 11-17-05 Edition)

RE: RE: Time For Tough Talk

The problem is that OBX’s current state of uncontrolled development will ultimately affect its fish population, thus affecting the fishing trade of NC. As a state, we owe it to our fishing industry to protect our own business owners and personal interests. Many NC fishermen are self-employed or small-business-employed, life-long residents of the Outer Banks.

As we all know, the vast majority of residential builders on the OBX are from VA and DC anyway. Let's concern ourselves with the welfare of NC workers and native residents first.

Friday, November 18, 2005

Prof urges fragging of U.S. officers

When Rebecca Beach, a freshman at Warren Community College in New Jersey e-mailed faculty announcing a campus program yesterday featuring decorated Iraq war hero Lt. Col. Scott Rutter, the response she got from one English professor took her aback.

English professor John Daly replied: "Real freedom will come when soldiers in Iraq turn their guns on their superiors."


Your tax dollars at work. Yes, this was in New Jersey, but the college receives federal funds as well.

RE: Time For Tough Talk

I knew Linda Brinson wouldn't be able to publish a libertarian-sounding piece like this without invoking fascism at some point. I was with her all the way until she wrote this:

And state legislators should be working hard to curb coastal development.

Horse feathers! Should we, as taxpayers, stop subsidizing people who have to rebuild their coastal homes every two or three years? Absolutely! We should never have gotten into that business in the first place. As an aside, people might find it instructive to learn just how many of our fine legislators (from both sides of the aisle) have beach property. Should we tell people that if they choose to build in these locations, they are on their own? You betcha. Should we tell people they can't build on their own property? Not on your life.

RE: Privitaized Space Exploration

By law, treaty and basic human right, outer space is like the ocean: it belongs to all of us. Ever since its inception, the U.S. space program has been a slow and methodical beast, obsessed with safety and redundancy, with small steps rather than giant leaps. And with tiny crews, or even no crews at all--when it can, NASA loves to send a robot to do a man's job. But where did they ever get the idea that we, the people, wanted it that way? Popular support for the space program springs from one simple fact: we all want to go. Since the earliest days of Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers, we've been a nation of frustrated astronauts, imprisoned by the gravity of our planet and its bureaucracies alike.

RE: Re: What Next For Conservatives

Sadly, social conservatives seem to have some difficulty picking their battles. Vox Day, my favorite Christian conservative commentator, has addressed this before. Some in the so-called "religious right" don't seem to understand that we are not fighting to establish a theocracy.

As Vox Day has said, if these folks would expend as much energy in getting government out of the schools as they do in fighting this pointless battle over evolution, we might actually get somewhere in our battle to reclaim education in America.

Privatized Space Exploration

Never fear, Steve. Richard Branson is on the case!

Maybe America's flashiest businessman can answer with Trump: A Space Odyssey? Nah, he's not that rich. Plus, he has a TV show and a 2008 presidential run to tend to.

RE: We are not alone

Should the government continue to fund NASA or has the program run it's course?

The government should never have funded NASA in the first place. The Kennedy administration pursued NASA as a way to beat the Russians into space (we lost that race, by the way). Now that there is a substantial business case for traveling to space, NASA should be shut down or privatized.

The space shuttle is outdated.

The space shuttle was outdated before it ever flew its first mission. Once again, its main purpose was not to further space exploration but as a PR tool.

Do we spend billions to replace it with a new form of space transport? Perhaps we should stop all manned space travel?

No and no. We leave space to private enterprise. Entrepreneurs are the best hope for the furtherance of space technology and exploration.

Time For Tough Talk

I, for one believe it is high-time we talk seriously about the over-development of our coast and the serious repercussions it has on our environment and our wallets. NC has an unusual coastline, made up of delicate barrier islands that shift and change constantly. All it takes is a drive up the coast from Nags Head to Corolla to see the potential for disaster.


It's time to cut federal tax support for coastal areas that are too risky to build on, he said, such as North Topsail Beach and some of the spots hit by Katrina.

...it is fair to ask whether taxpayers should continue to subsidize areas that are frequently hard-hit by storms. And state legislators should be working hard to curb coastal development. Now.
Overdevelopment can strain coastal areas that are already vulnerable and create an unfair burden on taxpayers. And, when the next huge hurricane hits, overdevelopment on the Tarheel coast could take its toll not only in property destruction but also in widespread deaths.

Re: What Next For Conservatives

Great column. As a matter of fact, I was going to post this very story before I saw that Andy had beat me to it. It also appeared in this morning's Winston-Salem Journal under this more appropriate header:

Sectarian Crusades Put Conservatism At Risk

I also saw this header elsewhere online while looking for the text:

Crusades unravel GOP coalition

But Andy neglected to post three of Will's words following the excerpt, This expressed the community's wholesome exasperation with the board's campaign to insinuate religion, in the guise of "intelligent design'' theory, into high school biology classes, beginning with a required proclamation that evolution "is not a fact.''

The words? But it is.

I especially like this bit:

"It does me no injury," said Thomas Jefferson, "for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." But it is injurious, and unneighborly, when zealots try to compel public education to infuse theism into scientific education. The conservative coalition, which is coming unglued for many reasons, will disintegrate if limited-government conservatives become convinced that social conservatives are unwilling to concentrate their character-building and soul-saving energies on the private institutions that mediate between individuals and government, and instead try to conscript government into sectarian crusades.

And that's precisely the problem for the GOP these days. Ol' George Will nailed it.

We are not alone

I think God, in his wisdom, has kept us well separated until we are mature and intelligent enough to deal with one another rationally, reasonably, and peacefully.

Excellent point, and one I haven't heard discussed. I agree that God would not limit his creative indevours to one lonely planet. Whether they could possibly look like us is debatable, although it is exciting to believe that they do. Perhaps the human race isn't ready to meet ET which explains why nothing else in our solar system is condusive to sustaining life as we know it. If we did make contact, could we handle it? (See the movie/read the book Contact by Carl Sagan.) It's out there; we just can't see it yet.

Which brings me to another question: Should the government continue to fund NASA or has the program run it's course? The space shuttle is outdated. Do we spend billions to replace it with a new form of space transport? Perhaps we should stop all manned space travel?

Thursday, November 17, 2005

'Cheney is vice president for torture'

From itv.com:

A former CIA director has exclusively told ITV News that torture is condoned and even approved by the Bush government.

The devastating accusations have been made by Admiral Stansfield Turner who labelled Dick Cheney "a vice president for torture".
Yours truly opines: I see this guy served during the Carter years. Why am I not surprised...

What next for conservatives

By George Will
Townhall.com

WASHINGTON --
The storm-tossed and rudderless Republican Party should particularly ponder the vote last week in Dover, Pa., where all eight members of the school board seeking re-election were defeated. This expressed the community's wholesome exasperation with the board's campaign to insinuate religion, in the guise of "intelligent design'' theory, into high school biology classes, beginning with a required proclamation that evolution "is not a fact.''

Big Lie Democrats

By Brandon Crocker
The American Spectator


When Bill Clinton left office in January 2001, he was convinced that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and active WMD research and production programs. George Tenet, the Clinton appointed head of the CIA, told George W. Bush prior to the war that the case that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction was "a slam dunk." Almost all of the Democratic members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, seeing much of the same intelligence reports given to the White House, and with direct access to the intelligence communities and raw intelligence data, agreed. The intelligence arms of most major foreign governments, including those that opposed the war, agreed. The UN concurred that Saddam had not accounted for stockpiles of WMD that were known to exist after the end of the first Gulf War. So, according to the U.S. Democratic leadership, there is only one logical conclusion that one can draw from the lack of WMD found in Iraq -- George W. Bush lied us into the war.


Pushing and Shoving

All the gung-ho movement types were itching to volunteer for the battlefield. Okay, here it is. They had better be as good as their word. Because there will not be another chance. If Alito ends up twisting in the wind, with conservatives suddenly finding some taint in an obscure ruling of his and leaving his carrion in the open field for the vultures, then it's over for them. They won't get another chance. Not now, not ever. Not with this President. Not with any future Republican President.

Jay D. Homnick

RE: You asked for it!!

You have to define life.

Is it likely that there is something organic scooting around in some medium somewhere? Undoubtedly so. God obviously cherishes life, so I would expect it to be abundant throughout his creation.

Is it likely that there are other sentient or semi-sentient creatures in the universe? Probably so. Once again, creation is obviously a delight to God, so I can't imagine he would limit his creative powers to one little dust mote.

Do they look like us? Probably. I think other creatures God created that have reached the level of mankind would necessarily resemble us. After all, he did create us in his own image, did he not? I think that also means that life on our level is limited to a very few places in the universe. I think God, in his wisdom, has kept us well separated until we are mature and intelligent enough to deal with one another rationally, reasonably, and peacefully. In other words, I don't expect to meet any of these other people in my lifetime. We can't even coexist well on our own little dustball, we could hardly be trusted to interact with any of God's other creations.

You asked for it!!

Topic for discussion:

Is there life on other planets?

My thought is yes, there is. We can't possibly be the only ones in the universe.

RE: No labels

Then why not have some interesting discussion on various topics without painting everything "liberal" or "conservative"?

"Interesting" is a very subjective and relative term. Since Andy created this as a forum on current events, the divison into liberal and conservative is probably inevitable. However, by all means, introduce a topic. You can be assured if it is interesting, it will be discussed.

I might surprise you with some of my ideas and opinions.

Indeed you might. However, since I seriously doubt you will suddenly decide that government-run schools are evil, that the welfare state is corrupt and degenerate and must be eliminated, that radical environmentalism is nothing more than Marxism in disguise, that the current black leadership are all a bunch of pompous race-pimps, that capitalism is a superior economic system when properly executed, that abortion on demand is completely immoral and should be outlawed, or that homosexuals do not deserve special rights, you would really have to come up with something unusual to surprise me. But I sit here, open-minded and ready to be surprised.

You disregard what I say before even reading it based on your assumptions.

Hello pot, have you met kettle? How can you know that? Do you have a secret camera that looks into my brain? Rest assured, I read every word you post. And now I'll reveal something: I, not unlike Strother, find the workings of the mind of someone raised and steeped in the culture of extreme liberalism fascinating. One of the most fundamental behaviors of such a person is the belief that their core system of understanding reality cannot possibly be mistaken and that anyone who disagrees either misunderstood the system or had prejudicially rejected it. I find the lengths to which people will go to protect their core understanding of reality infinitely fascinating and intellectually stimulating.

No Labels? Me No Understand

Hey B — you crazy Liberal. What? You think we can have a conversation/debate without labels, assumptions, and prejudice and just get along? I don't know what kind of fantasy world you are living in, but I'm living in America!

Turn off the John Lennon, pick a side, and get with the program!

No labels

Then why not have some interesting discussion on various topics without painting everything "liberal" or "conservative"? I might surprise you with some of my ideas and opinions. You disregard what I say before even reading it based on your assumptions.

RE: RE: Priorities

Whoa! You read WAY more into my post than what I intended. I was actually trying to make a pretty simple point and you blew it out of proportion.

Actually, I didn't. You referred to what you and Strother had been saying "all along." I simply combined what you posted with your past assertions and attitudes. If you have since had an epiphany and decided to join the ranks of the conservatives, then I apologize and say, "Welcome!"

Instead of taking one's word at face-value, we try to read into it what we believe a person is saying based on their political party.

I wouldn't have any idea what your political party might be. I could make an educated guess, but it would just as likely be wrong. I don't need to read anything into what you are saying. You have been perfectly clear on your beliefs in the past. See above for my caveat on intervening epiphanies.

I'm not trying to push my beliefs on anyone.

You were not so accused, counsellor. However, when you go out and vote for liberals, you are, in effect, "pushing" your beliefs on everybody, as is everyone who votes. But this forum isn't about pushing beliefs on anyone. That would be impossible anyway from this venue. This forum is about point and counterpoint. This forum is about the presentation of ideas so that consumers of it can be enlightened and make up their own minds.

RE: Priorities

Whoa! You read WAY more into my post than what I intended. I was actually trying to make a pretty simple point and you blew it out of proportion. It's clear to see why there is such turmoil in American politics. Instead of taking one's word at face-value, we try to read into it what we believe a person is saying based on their political party.

I'm not trying to push my beliefs on anyone. I'm just stating what they are. There is a difference. It's fine with me if other folks want to live the way that I described in my earlier post. What isn't fine is when their attitudes begin to affect my life. If that were my husband who was working all the time and didn't have time for me, it wouldn't be fine. Thank goodness he doesn't have that mindset.

Autonomy Loses Out

From an editorial in today's Winston-Salem Journal:

The relatively few moderate and liberal Baptists who made it to the annual meeting of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina this week once again took a beating from conservatives. But the real loser was autonomy, which was long the tie that bound Baptists and helped them in concert to provide a multitude of needed services for those outside their doors.

Autonomy took its latest hit as Baptists gathering at Joel Coliseum this week discussed homosexuality. The messengers, or delegates, to the meeting voted overwhelmingly to break away from any member church that "knowingly affirms, approves or endorses homosexual behavior." The convention's board of directors still has to hammer out the details of how that resolution will be carried out. But the message is clear: The state convention, just as the Southern Baptist Convention that most of its active members support, is setting more of the rules - not the local church, as had long been Baptist tradition.

RE: Getting our priorities straight

And this is all that Strother and I have been saying all along.

No, it isn't. What you have been saying all along is that some collective authority should preempt free choice and free will and force people to perform to your vision of a perfect society. What you have been saying all along is that people cannot be left to their own devices to do the right thing, so it is up to an anointed elite to enforce your vision on the benighted. And that is the fundamental difference between a conservative and a liberal.

Earthly wealth must be kept in check.

By whom? It is up to individuals to accomplish this on their own and in their own time. Your path to the kingdom of God does not include dragging others along with you. You will not be judged by how many of the benighted you forced into the path of righteousness, this makes you no better than the religious zealots you decry. You say you follow the teachings of Jesus, so be it. His teachings do not include an amoral collectivist authority that robs Peter to pay Paul.

When the desire to make more and more money begins to consume you, it's time to re-evaluate your priorities.

Indeed it is. It is also time to re-evaluate your priorities when you begin down the path of forcing others to re-evaluate theirs. Lead by example, but do not attempt to lead by force. The socialist state leads by force and is, therefore, immoral.

I am concerned for a society that values material goods over happiness.

And this is where the trouble begins. First, your concern grows to a desire for action. When you discover that "society" is completely amorphous, the only alternative is to anthropomorphize it and turn it into some malleable entity. As soon as that occurs, you must then force the elements that are amorphous into a known state in order to deal with it as a concrete entity. These are the first steps on the road to fascism and totalitarianism.

Your concern is admirable and one I share. What I do not share is your desire to relieve that concern through the auspices of government. Christ did not come and force people to see the light. He showed them the door and left it to them to knock.

What I also do not share is your antipathy toward capitalism. You have transmuted a working and completely moral and ethical system into one of degeneracy, solely on the basis of anecdotal evidence. Every day, millions of ordinary people go about the business of capitalism to their own and their neighbors' mutual benefit. This activity coalesces into a general benefit to multiple societies and collectives of humans. Yet because a few would use the system for ends not matching your vision, you would douse the entire system, regardless of your assertions to the contrary. A moral and ethical system of capitalism can only exist in a context of complete free choice. As soon as an anointed elite seek to preempt that choice through government regulation, the entire ethos of the system begins to collapse. Those who would pervert the system to their own ends are undeterred by the ineptitude of a one-size-fits-all bureaucracy. Yet those who would have operated within the confines of an ethical system are driven by onerous interference to subversion of their own to varying degrees. It is the anointed elite who have created the current degenerate system, not the so-called "robber barons" who you and other liberals regularly demonize. The sooner we begin to dismantle the overbearing and intrusive system under which we live, the sooner we can return to the ethical and moral system that fits the vision you and I both share.