Uncategorized

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Technology - Uncategorized

Busted again! Google ranked worst!

December 13, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google ranked worst in “One World Trust” survey on openness and transparency

The Financial Times reported that One World Trust is publishing the results of a new world survey that ranks Google worst in the world on openness and transparency.

This worst in the world ranking comes on the heels of a recent Privacy International survey that also found that Google was worst in the world on privacy. Now two independent and respected non-governmental groups have independently found that Google is worst in the world on the values that it claims are very important to the company: openness and privacy.

One World Trust “conducts research on practical ways to make global organisations more responsive to the people they affect, and on how the rule of law can be applied equally to all. It educates political leaders and opinion-formers about the findings of its research.”

  • Out of a possible score of 100 Google got a 17. Ouch. Even the math whizes at Google can see that is not a good score.
  • And since the top performer, UNDP, got an 88, there is no grading curve that will save Google’s bacon on this one.

It is good to get additional third party confirmation of many of the themes I have been blogging about for over a year and a half related to Google. A central theme I have harped on is Google’s hypocrisy and double standard: where it has one standard of behavior it expects of others and another for itself.

The most galling has been its push for “open” access and net neutrality for its broadband competitors but not for Google — even though Google has more market share in its market than the competitive broadband industry has.
Continue reading “Busted again! Google ranked worst!”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - History - Media Bias - News - President - Religion - Society/Culture - Thomas Brewton - Uncategorized

Primary Perspective

December 13, 2007 by

-By Thomas E. Brewton

Presidential primary campaigns illustrate politics as manipulation of, as well as pandering to, public opinion, with no necessary connection to political wisdom.

Gail Collins, editorial page editor of the New York Times, in a December 8 edition op-ed article, reflects liberals’ embrace of mobocracy at the expense of Constitutional government.

She writes:

Romney’s message, which boiled down to let’s-all-be-religious-together, was certainly different from the John Kennedy version, which argued that a candidate’s religion is irrelevant. But then Kennedy was speaking to the country, while Romney had his attention fixed on the approximately 35,000 Iowa religious conservatives who will tip the balance in the first-in-the-nation Republican caucus.

Can I pause here briefly to point out that in New York there are approximately 35,000 people living on some blocks? If my block got to decide the first presidential caucus, I guarantee you we would be as serious about our special role as the folks in Iowa are. And right now Mitt Romney would be evoking the large number of founding fathers who were agnostics.

First, there was no “large number of founding fathers who were agnostics.”
Continue reading “Primary Perspective”

2nd Amendment - Constitution - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - History - Media Bias - Military - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

The oh so controversial second amendment

December 13, 2007 by

-By Bruce Kauffmann
Special to the Terre Haute, Indiana Tribune-Star

I saw this and jsut had to get it on Publius’ Forum…

The oh so controversial second amendment

— When the Bill of Rights was ratified this week (Dec. 15) in 1791, the Founders never dreamed that centuries later the Second Amendment would become so controversial. To them, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,” was fairly straightforward language.

How wrong they were, as evidenced by the Supreme Court’s recent decision to rule on whether Washington, D.C.’s strict firearms law violates the Constitution, “a decision,” The Washington Post wrote, “that will raise the politically and culturally divisive issue of gun control just in time for the 2008 elections.”

The main controversy is over the phrase “A well regulated militia,” and its relationship to the statement “the people’s right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Gun-control advocates believe this language means that if you don’t belong to a “regulated militia” your right to own a gun can be “infringed.”

Gun-rights advocates counter by noting that the amendment does not grant a right; it recognizes a right already granted. The amendment does not say, “The people have the right to keep and bear arms.”

It says, “the (already established) right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” And they have a point. As even the Supreme Court has acknowledged, the right to own firearms precedes the Bill of Rights.

Gun advocates also note that because the amendment gives the right to bear arms to the “people,” not the states, claiming that this right is dependent on anything the states do or don’t do — including forming militias — is ludicrous. After all, the Bill of Rights mentions no specific rights that the states possess, but several the people do.

Two additional points: In 1791, most state militias did not give guns to militiamen when militias were formed. Militiamen brought their guns with them — from home. Indeed, the amendment says they can “keep” their firearms, not merely “bear” them during military service.

Finally, (my hero) James Madison’s original Second Amendment language was as follows: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country.” Written that way, he is saying that if the people don’t have the right to arms, there can’t be a militia. That Congress reversed the order does not change Madison’s intent.

Granted, all constitutional rights, including free speech and gun ownership, are subject to reasonable restrictions — you can’t yell “Fire” in a crowded theater, and felons can’t possess firearms. But the general right to own firearms is constitutionally protected. We will see what the Supreme Court thinks.

Bruce Kauffmann’s e-mail address is bruce@historylessons.net

00Publius Contributor - ACLU - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Media Bias - News - President - Religion - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

ACLU Claims Religious Test ‘Proposed as a Necessary Qualification’ for President

December 12, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

If you can’t win your issue by the strength of your argument… then lie. Apparently that is the tactic of the ACLU if a recent “ACLU’s Diary” entry on the DailyKos by T. Jeremy Gunn is any indication. With all the talk of religion surrounding the various candidates for the GOP nomination for president lately it has obviously been driving our ACLU Director of Freedom of Religion and Belief out of his gourd. (Though, one is excused for thinking that his title is a bit misleading for it should probably be a Freedom from Religion and Belief, but be that as it may…) Gunn goes off half cocked over the supposed forced imposition of religion on the campaign for president.

The lie concerns Mr. Gunn’s shot at Romney claiming that he and others have created a new “religious test” as a qualification for a candidate in contravention to the Constitution.

Belief in monotheism has now been proposed as a necessary qualification for someone who wants to be president. So if you are a believer in the Dalai Lama’s religion, Buddhism, this country was not meant for you. If you are a follower of Mahatma Gandhi’s religion, Hinduism, – just check your American dream at the door.

Naturally, Gunn’s claim is an outright lie. His overly emotional blather is easily falsified by merely asking for his claim to be backed up with proof. Unfortunately, Gunn missed his target, because there is no one anywhere who has seriously made up such a proposal. No no religious organization, no Party, no, city, town, State, or Federal government proposal has been introduced anywhere in this country that a religious test be proposed to act as a qualification to run for president. Heck, not even a single candidate has uttered such nonsense.

Continue reading “ACLU Claims Religious Test ‘Proposed as a Necessary Qualification’ for President”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Unions - Warner Todd Huston

Don’t Belong to the Union? Pay Dues Anyway… Don’t You DARE Complain

December 12, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Only a union could call extorted faux dues payments a “fair share fee” and complain when people want to use the democratic process to stop being forced to pay the extortion. Apparently, Inland Empire’s Caltrans HQ in downtown San Bernadino saw the gathering of non-union State workers who wanted to vote out their forced payment of union dues (euphemistically called “fair share fees”) at an upcoming vote but they were scolded by SEIU Local 1000 prez, Davy Hart, for their desire to stop paying the “fees.”

Of course, Mr. Hart almost has a point about why they might be expected to pay these so-called “fair share fees” and that is because the dolts in Sacramento (Calif.’s State capitol) have passed a really, really stupid law that states that the Local 1000 has to represent all employees whether they are part of the union or not. Of course, this is another example of the incestuous relationship between union thugs and Democrats because such a law should never have been passed in the first place. So, no wonder Davey-boy is a bit miffed. After all, the “fair share fees” that he has come to expect do fund his work on behalf of non-union employees.

On the other hand… and it is a hand that is far more logical and in the right… why should anyone who chooses not to join the union have to pay anything? Who has a right to make a worker a defacto member of a union they don’t want by passing an absurd law that says you are represented whether you like it or not, and THEN force you to pay dues that aren’t called dues!!??
Continue reading “Don’t Belong to the Union? Pay Dues Anyway… Don’t You DARE Complain”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Kansas Attny Gen Sex Scandal: Will MSM Mention He’s a Democrat?

December 12, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Warner Todd Huston

In a breaking story, the recently elected Democrat Attorney General of Kansas has found himself caught up in a sex scandal and it’s one he isn’t even completely denying. A.G. Paul Morrison is admitting that he had a relationship with former staffer, Linda Carter (No, not of TVs Wonder Woman fame). And now, ladies and gentlemen, we get to play one of our favorite sex scandal games, “Democrat or Republican,” where we see if in MSM reports we find out if our scandal enmeshed politician is a nasty Republican or a somehow unmentioned Democrat. But THIS story is going to make it hard on our left spinning MSM, because Paul Morrison is both a Democrat AND a Republican — well, at least he was a Republican until he switched parties in 2005. The MSM are going to lose their tiny minds trying to spin this one!

Here’s the story from the Kansas City Star:

Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison has confirmed having an extramarital affair with a former staffer, but he is disputing allegations that he asked her for information about her new boss, Phill Kline.

Linda Carter, who worked in the Johnson County District Attorney’s office — first under Morrison and then under Kline — has filed a sexual harassment complaint alleging that she and Morrison had a two-year sexual relationship.

Ooopsie. For his part, Democrat Morrison is admitting the relationship but denying that he harassed the woman.

Continue reading “Kansas Attny Gen Sex Scandal: Will MSM Mention He’s a Democrat?”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Islam - Islamofascism - Media Bias - Military - News - President - Religion - Security/Safety - Uncategorized

The Lies of the Clintons – The Iraq War – Opinions versus the Truth

December 12, 2007 by

-By Vincent Bemowski

Bill Clinton’s Claim of Opposing Iraq War From Outset Disputed – “A former senior aide to then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice disputed Bill Clinton’s statement this week that he “opposed Iraq from the beginning,” saying that the former president was privately briefed by top White House officials about war planning in 2003 and that he told them he supported the invasion.”

Commentary: More lies from the spiritually shallow Clintons. (See: Text Of Clinton’s Feb. 17, 1998 Statement On Iraq- President Clinton’s address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff ) “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”

Background: On May 2, 2003 Pope Benedict XVI, as Cardinal Ratzinger, (Head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) stated: “He (John Paul II) did not impose this position (‘Iraq War not necessary’) as doctrine of the Church but as the appeal of a conscience enlightened by faith” (Zenit News Agency).

The above statement by Pope Benedict, while truthful, does not reveal any evidence that these two men actually prayed about this issue like President George W. Bush did. Since there is only ONE Holy Spirit, why are Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger’s views on the Iraq War the same as radical Islamists, terrorists, morally corrupt left-wing liberal Democrats, biased people in the U.S. media, immoral Hollywood movie “stars,” and other selfish, spoiled Americans? The answer is that they were simply “opinions” that were confirmed to be incorrect because of the morally twisted people that agreed with them. Many other good men & women (including veterans who suffered far more than Pope John Paul II did during World War II) did pray about this matter & strongly disagreed with their conclusions – and to this day continue to disagree with Pope Benedict XVI on this moral issue. You are known by the type company you keep, and this is also true of your opinions. When your opinion is according to God’s Holy Will, many good people will agree with you, but if your opinion is not according to God’s Will, for the most part people not right with God will find agreement with your point of view.
Continue reading “The Lies of the Clintons – The Iraq War – Opinions versus the Truth”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Health - History - Nancy Salvato - News - Religion - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

What If the Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness Was Relative?

December 12, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Nancy Salvato

For thousands of years, people have pondered the age old question, why I am here and what happens when I die. Depending on the answers a person hears during this time on earth, there can be a variety of different explanations. For many of us, there is the notion that we are here to serve a higher purpose. For others, life is simply what we make of it and it’s over when our bodies cease to function. Which answer is correct and how do we know?

The secular position on this question could be summed up by saying that, “the human race [is] an accidental by-product of blind material forces.” [1] The secularists come to such a conclusion by employing scientific reasoning to prove what is knowable and justify their position by saying that there is no evidence to believe in what is unknowable. Non secularists use scientific reasoning to argue that there is a God which began the whole chain of events which resulted in the human race.

Stephen Barr, in Anthropic Coincidences suggests because, ìlife depends on a delicate balance among the various fundamental forces of nature,î [2] the seemingly random chain of events which led up to our existence were perhaps not so random and were only possible if there was some catalyst for our coming into being. “The laws of nature did not have to be as they are; and the laws of nature had to be very special in form if life were to be possible.” [3]
Continue reading “What If the Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness Was Relative?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Entertainment - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

NBC Ad Sales Refunds – More Dinosaur Media Woes

December 11, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

The world of entertainment is in a world of hurt. With the massive diversification of entertainment offerings these days, older forms of media — like movies, TV and newspapers — are finding a dwindling number of customers as NBC is finding out this month. NBC has found itself in the lamentable position of giving their advertisers refunds because of poor performance in its ratings. The promised number of eyes that NBC promised that advertisers would reach didn’t materialize, so NBC has to refund their advertisers for the over estimate of viewers that might see the ads placed on their airwaves. Of course, NBC is trying to keep a lid on this damaging story, but the Genie is out of that bottle. We can surely say that the network’s News arms ain’t helpin’ sales a whole lot, in any case!

Adweek gives us the story:

NBC has quietly begun reimbursing advertisers for fourth-quarter prime-time ratings shortfalls, averaging about $500,000 per advertiser, according to media buyers, marking the first time in years a network has taken such a step to compensate marketers for ratings deficiencies.

It was also reported in Adweek that new network CW has had a loss of ratings and an over estimate of ad revenue, as well. So has CBS, ABC, and Fox, all of whom are giving advertisers “make goods” wherein the networks give ad time in compensation for having overcharged the advertisers.

And what is the culprit?

Continue reading “NBC Ad Sales Refunds – More Dinosaur Media Woes”

00Publius Contributor - Education - GOP - History - News - Patriotism - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Has Conservatism Lost its Soul?

December 11, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

For those of you who feel that the conservative movement has lost its soul, the New Centurion Program has begun.

I quote from their webpage:

Typically, programs focus on either intellectual cultivation or communication skills. Our program seeks to synthesize both the wisdom of our conservative heritage as well as the most up to date practical experience from local experts in public policy and communication.

There are specific reasons The New Centurion Program is different from existing programs. First, it is locally based with a local concentration of students and lecturers. While there is certainly an over-arching theoretical basis to the coursework, that theoretical knowledge will be focused on local issues. Our Centurions do not have to travel to Auburn University or Washington D.C. – we bring the course to them. We plant roots in a community. Our students ages range from 18 – 70.

When a movement is lacking vision or a mission – as many conclude is the current state of the conservative movement; one must believe that by going back to the beginning and teaching the foundations of conservatism, providing individuals with a wealth of resources and reference materials and supportive relationships to facilitate that intellectual journey; it provides the analytical and practical tools necessary for individuals to grow and lead.

This is not a class for a grade. This is a course for an “experience;” a journey. This is not a campaign school. There are many other institutions that are great at providing these type of tactics and strategies – that is not our purpose.

So, what are we? In a nutshell – we provide the environment where “book smarts meet street smarts.”

I, for one, have always harped on education for conservatives being the bedrock upon which we can build. And that, without that knowledge, we are doomed to failure as well as doomed to be short lived. If we do not teach our young people the true values and underlying principles of the conservative movement, along with the logic and history to those principles, we simply cannot continue to create new conservatives into the future.

Conservatives have been the only ones with ideas since Barry Goldwater strode the national stage. Liberals have failed to keep up with scholarship and intellectual pursuits where conservatives have excelled, undermining the leftist movements world wide.

Check out this new group. It is sure to be worth your time.
Continue reading “Has Conservatism Lost its Soul?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Unions - Warner Todd Huston

Colorado Gov. Gives Unions Backdoor Win

December 11, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Our pal Billy Ritter, Governor of Colorado, was not so “august” enough as to allow either the legislature nor the people of his fair state to have a chance to vote on whether they wanted a union to gain a huge amount of power over the state’s public workers there. Instead of allowing the democratic process to reign supreme, Billy boy decreed his payoff to big labor by executive order not long ago.

Ritter has issued an executive order that will create a “bargaining partnership” between the state and its public sector workers. But, not to worry, Billy assures us, it has a “very clear” no-strike provision.

Color me unconvinced. After all, the existence of a union presupposes that they will have the power to strike and walk off the job in case their thuggish demands are not met. Otherwise, what teeth would any such organization have and why would it bother to exist?

Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman (a Republican) is not very happy and he and other GOP state office holders claim they will ignore the Guv’s Monarchical degree. “This effort is clearly not in the interest of Colorado’s taxpayers and will not lead to more efficient government,” Coffman said.

Naturally, the louts that work for the state are thrilled by this overstepping of their union beholding Guv.
Continue reading “Colorado Gov. Gives Unions Backdoor Win”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Education - Frederick Meekins - News - Religion - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

Ought To Make A Watergate Conspirator Blush

December 11, 2007 by

-By Frederick Meekins

In Matthew 10:16, Christians are admonished to be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves. Often though, Christian organizations and ministries are the ones at the forefront of propagating the expectation in the mind of their respective supporters that sincere believers are — in the words of the Washington Post — to be uneducated and easy to command.

The Angel Tree Project is a program administered by Prison Fellowship Ministries where Christmas gifts are provided to the children of the incarcerated on behalf of their parents. While there is nothing wrong per say with such acts of charity even though Prison Fellowship mouthpieces such as Chuck Colson get heavy-handed at times that it is somehow the fault of the average American that these misunderstood souls are behind bars and that these convicts are the 21st century equivalent of Rousseau’s noble savage or somehow on par with Mother Teresa in terms of moral goodness as derailed in my column “A Big Helping Of Christmas Guilt” published in 2003, one way in which this charitable outreach markets itself to the broader Christian community might make some of Colson’s fellow Watergate conspirators blush in terms of its duplicity and slight of hand.

One of the techniques organizations across the religious and political spectrum use to get the unsuspecting and gullible to part with their hard earned money is direct mail fundraising where pity party letters are sent out laying the guilt on recipients that somehow if they do not respond with the requested contribution that the world is somehow going to come to an end. With such melodrama, the least one could ask for is at least a little consistency.
Continue reading “Ought To Make A Watergate Conspirator Blush”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Frank Salvato - GOP - Media Bias - News - President - Religion - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

So, What’s The Big Deal About Religion in ’08?

December 11, 2007 by

-By Frank Salvato

We have come to a point in the 2008 presidential election cycle where both political parties’ candidates are fielding questions about religion. While religion is a personal issue for an overwhelming majority of Americans, religion in government has been frowned upon ever since the ACLU took an active roll in purging it from the “public square.” So, it would seem at odds with the dogma of the Secular Progressive Left that religion should be an election issue at all. Yet each candidate has had to answer questions about their faith, with Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney being literally scrutinized on the issue.

If we are to believe there actually exists a “separation of church and state,” a notion that exists nowhere in the Charters of Freedom (The Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights, our Founding Documents) then the issue of religion should be out of bounds when Americans publicly debate the strengths and weaknesses of candidates for elected office. If we are to believe this incorrect interpretation of the Constitution, then religion should be a private matter, exclusive to the individual.

Why then is the issue of the candidates’ religions receiving so much attention from the secular mainstream news media? What does it matter if Mitt Romney is a Mormon or that Mike Huckabee is Evangelical?

The logical answer to these questions is that the Secular Progressive Left – and especially the agenda-driven, “in-the-pocket,” secular mainstream media – is trying to scare the American people into believing that if a man of faith is elected to office he will defer to the tenets of his religion over his constitutionally mandated duty to administer and follow the laws of the land. They are trying to frighten the American people into adhering to the politically correct secular ideology of purging all religion from the “public square.”
Continue reading “So, What’s The Big Deal About Religion in ’08?”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - History - Media Bias - News - President - Race - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Dick Simpson Whitewashing 60s Radicals

December 10, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

They always say that the passage of time sometimes dulls the memory of a person’s past, that oft times only the good memories remain. More often, though, time plus a large dollop of myth making and lies creates a whole new world out of the past. Dick Simpson is more evidence of the later than the former. In a whitewashing of the foolishness and destruction wrought by his anti-American comrades in the vaunted “summer of love,” Chicago Sun-Times columnist Simpson wonders “Can we revive ’60s-era ideals?” Surely, anyone who has a clear memory of those tumultuous days would quickly reply, “I sure hope not!”

To start with, Simpson ridiculously presents as fact at least one of the arguments for what the country “faced” in 1967 as framed by the radical leftists that formed the emerging counter culture of the 60s. He states in a factual way that the country, “faced three great crises: racial discrimination, the Vietnam War, and the imperial presidency in which all executive, legislative and judicial power was being gathered into the hands of the president.”

Now, who cannot agree with his first two issues? But that third one in retrospect is as silly as it gets. If LBJ — who was the Democrat president in 1967 and 1968, as you know — had created an “imperial presidency” in which was vested “all executive, legislative and judicial power” then why did he have to bow out of running for a second full term in the upcoming 1968 presidential election during those same years? LBJ did make a mash of Vietnam, it is true, but to imagine he had created the so-called “imperial presidency” that the country “faced” as a problem is not a rendition of the factual situation in 1967 but is merely a parroting of the uninformed opinion of the 60s hippies that began their efforts to undermine society at that time.

Now, the only real quibble Simpson’s uninformed contemporaries had with LBJ was his conduct of the war yet Simpson includes civil rights as an issue they protested for and an issue this legitimately nation faced. But LBJ was a leading figure in helping to push the civil rights agenda so Simpson’s protesters could hardly have had too much against Johnson on that count. State laws and practices were far more the obstacle to civil rights than Federal, in the final analysis. Yet, Simpson uncritically regurgitates the far left’s talking points even this far removed from the era when any unbiased review of the real history of the era proves those claims to be balderdash by now.

In his next colorful paragraph he continues to employ the failed assumptions of the losers in the counter culture movement quite despite sense and reality.
Continue reading “Dick Simpson Whitewashing 60s Radicals”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - GOP - Immigration/Immigrants - Media Bias - News - Patriotism - President - Race - Religion - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Philly Inquirer: Pistol Packing GOP Candidates at Debates

December 10, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Apparently, the Philly Inquirer wants us to know that the GOP candidates for president are drooling, half sentient, Bible thumping, gun toting, racists. Oh, and Fred Thompson is stupid and lazy. Just as apparently, the Philadelphia Inquirer is having trouble finding writers for their rag. I mean, what else could explain their giving a teenager a shot at filling space in the Sunday issue? Of course, I could be wrong. It could be that Dick Polman only writes like a 15-year-old. Worse, Polman seems to have sold himself to the Inquirer as some sort of comedian with “The American Debate, For the love of guns, God and Reagan,” too. But, if he IS an adult and really does think his Sunday piece is funny, well, there’s no accounting for taste — or sense — on the far left, I suppose. I guess the joke is on the readers of the Inquirer.

Billed as “what the GOP candidates might say in the next Iowa debate to woo conservatives,” Polman has decided the only thing that will do so is to appear as a gun crazed, racist that mindlessly echos Ronald Reaganisms. Like I said, it was supposed to be funny… I guess.

All the Republican presidential candidates will debate, again, on Wednesday in Iowa. Here’s an exclusive look at the advance transcript.

And here is what Polman imagines is the first question:

All these candidates have said they support guns. But talk is cheap. I want to know if they’re all proudly carrying their own guns, right now, right here on this stage.

Gentlemen, a show of hands . . . oh, my . . . that’s quite an arsenal up there. Somebody nudge Fred Thompson, wake him up. Sen. Thompson? Hello? What do you have?

So, what does Polman imagine the candidates will say?

Fred Thompson: Uhhh, got me a AP4 carbine rifle with a 16-inch barrel. This little ole honey would have surely impressed Ronald Reagan.

Rudy Giuliani: So what? Mine’s a bolt-action Remington. With a 24-inch barrel. Mine’s bigger than yours. And that’s not all I got. Say hello to my Charter Arms .44. It’s ideal for home defense against Islamofascists, because 9/11 changed everything. By the way, fuggedaboutit, I can see that there’s one wuss on this stage.

Mitt Romney: Yes, it’s true: I am not armed at this time. But I did just buy a gun cabinet for Christmas, and I have the receipt right here, with copies for everyone, see? From Dick’s Sporting Goods, and, my gosh, it’s a beauty. Wood veneer, tempered glass, holds six long guns

(Candidates scrutinize the receipt. Civil cross talk.)

You can just feel that Leno’s bookers are getting on the phone to book this funny man on the Tonight Show, eh? On second thought, he shouldn’t give up his job at McDonald’s just in case. There’s an old joke about comedy that comedians like to throw out: “Don’t try this at home, kids.” It’s a bit of advice that neither Dick Polman nor the Philly Inquirer seem to have followed.

Continue reading “Philly Inquirer: Pistol Packing GOP Candidates at Debates”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - News - Patriotism - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

This is America, speak Spanish

December 10, 2007 by

-By Michael M. Bates

I find it annoying to call a telephone number and have to press 1 to proceed in English. It seems to me that our national language should routinely be used and callers wishing an alternative should be the ones to select a number.

We’ve come very far from the sentiment of Teddy Roosevelt, who believed, “We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.” That’s not politically correct by today’s standards and the U.S. government explicitly disdains such views. A model of current official thinking is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s tormenting of the Salvation Army for setting up an English-only policy for its workers.

In Massachusetts, the Salvation Army gave all employees one year in which to learn English and speak it while on the job. Two people who sorted clothes for the agency refused and were terminated.

Enter the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Deciding that the Salvation Army’s action had embarrassed, humiliated, inconvenienced and inflicted emotional pain on the fired employees, last April the EEOC sued the Christian organization for back pay, damages and an end its “discriminatory rules.”
Continue reading “This is America, speak Spanish”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Family - News - Religion - Selwyn Duke - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

He’s Gonna Find Out Who’s Naughty or Nice… or Stupid

December 10, 2007 by

By Selwyn Duke

Sometimes I could believe I was living in the Matrix. Only, I can’t imagine sentient programs creating a world as irrational as ours.

We’ve come to expect the usual Christmastime attacks upon tradition in the name of the mythical “separation of church and state”; the nativity scene on public property and school Christmas celebrations are favorite targets. Then we have those wonderfully inclusive “holiday trees.” But now, hell’s sleigh bells, Santa Claus is under assault.

Is it because his image smacks of religion? Is it because he is also known as St. Nicholas? No and no. It is far, well, more stupid than that. Here’s the first of two examples of Santa insanity:

Some people don’t want Santa Claus to say “ho-ho-ho” because it could be demeaning to women.

I kid you not.

I first heard about this idea being posited by some rubber-room candidates in Australia, but now it’s happening here, too. Writes the Austin American-Statesman,
Continue reading “He’s Gonna Find Out Who’s Naughty or Nice… or Stupid”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

At Last, AP to Enter the Internet Age with ‘AP Version 2.0′

December 9, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Warner Todd Huston

Al Gore must’ve gotten to the Associated Press and introduced to them his invention, the Internet, because they have announced a refit for the new news age. The New York Times spins some coverage for the venerable news wire service’s newest venture, even taking the chance to extend a compliment for AP’s creation of the “24-hour news cycle” (I know, that one made my head turn, too). So, at last the AP has decided the world has changed… took ’em long enough.

First off, let’s dispense with the Times’ claims that the AP invented the “24-hour news cycle.”

After a decade of watching newspapers and rival wire services shrink, The Associated Press, the 161-year-old news cooperative, is refitting itself to handle the 24-hour news cycle it helped create.

Gosh, the rest of the world pins that “creation” on the cable news networks, not the AP. In fact, the 24-hour news cycle came into being long before that when the telegraph was first introduced in the USA by Samuel Morse. Still, if the AP had been at the forefront of creating that new cycle for news, how is it that they are so far behind now? If, according to the NYT, this raving compliment were right, it would have seemed the AP would have been at the front of the wave. So why the late-timed refit? Perhaps the NYT indulged in a bit of undeserved praise, eh?

Do ya think!?

Continue reading “At Last, AP to Enter the Internet Age with ‘AP Version 2.0′”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Islam - Islamofascism - Media Bias - Military - Nancy Morgan - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

We’re Winning!

December 9, 2007 by 1 Comment

-By Nancy Morgan

Question: If success in Iraq isn’t reported, does that mean it’s not news?

Last month saw the trickle of positive news from Iraq turn into a flood. Our troops, our allies and the people of Iraq are winning the war against fanatical jihadists murderers. By any measure. But curiously, the American media, the same media that gave 24/7 coverage of Abu Ghraib, Haditha, and the “quagmire” in Iraq, has suddenly gone silent.

Here’s a sampling of the astonishing good news out of Iraq in just this last week. News our American media either overlooked or relegated to a couple paragraphs – sandwiched between winter holiday advertisements and the exciting news of how presidential Hillary is looking:

Sen. Lindsey Graham, just back from a Thanksgiving trip to Iraq, said the recent surge of U.S. troops is so successful, it’s “history in the making.”

Nearly 6,000 Sunni Arab residents joined a security pact with American forces last Wednesday, in what U.S. officers described as a critical step in plugging the remaining escape routes for terrorists. That’s 6,000 Sunnis now working with us instead of against us. Very good news.

Neighborhood Christians and Muslims attended a mass to celebrate the reopening of St. John’s Church in Baghdad on November 15. Imagine that. Christians and Muslims celebrating together. In Baghdad. Awesome.
Continue reading “We’re Winning!”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Science - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Taxes - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Island Shrinking by Global Warming… But for Over 100 Years?

December 8, 2007 by 2 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

Global warming acolytes have a favorite image, that of Al Gore’s fabulist tale of 20 foot waves engulfing our coast lines. Invoking that awesome image, the L.A. Times published a story last month that is supposed to be just another global warming scare piece. Still, even the Times couldn’t lie through its teeth in every instance because, while the island of Kivalina, Alaska really has been shrinking, even the Times admits its been doing so for well over 100 years.

It’s a bit hard to pin that all on “global warming,” though, since few claim that the phenomenon has been going on for over 100 years. After all, globaloney scaremongers pin global warming on CFCs and rising CO2 levels none of which were started until after the turn of the century from 1800s to the 1900s. So, why blame global warming when normal erosion has been at work on the island for hundreds of years? Ah, because it makes a better story to fit your ideological position, of course!

But, despite the use of common sense, the Times waxes despondent over the erosion of this rather stark and unattractive Alaskan island and the dissension that loss is sowing amongst the 400 residents there. And in doing so they miss a larger and much more interesting story.

“As global warming erodes their world, the residents of Kivalina battle the elements — and now one another.”

Oh, how worrisome… or is that wearisome?

But, even as the Times tries their darndest to pin the shrinking island’s fate on global warming, the Times can’t ignore the real truth here.

“Kivalina is disappearing, the victim of a warming world and a steady natural erosion that probably began long before the Eskimos settled here 100 years ago. “

Wait a minute. The island has been shrinking for more than 100 years? So, um, how can it be all caused by global warming? After all, the globaloney crowd says it’s man’s fault with all of his industry, cars and decadent lifestyles, right? Well, there wasn’t much of that a’ goin’ on in the 1890s and before!

Continue reading “Island Shrinking by Global Warming… But for Over 100 Years?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - News - Society/Culture - Taxes - Uncategorized - Unions - Warner Todd Huston

Union Organized With Less Than 30% of ‘Employees’ Agreeing to Representation?

December 8, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

The Associated Press brings us a doozie of a story about the creation of an entirely new area of union representation created in order to represent a workforce that mostly doesn’t even know they have a union in the first place. For that matter, this new union representation has a workforce the majority of which didn’t vote to join. This was one neat trick for the union, for sure. In essence the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) created a new branch of their union out of whole cloth with the approving nod of 11 Democrat state administrations.

How did they do it? They sent a postcard in the mail and since a bunch came back saying they’d like the idea, wham-o-change-o a union was created out of thin air. But here is the thing: there was no vote, there were no mass meetings, there was no election of leadership… the unions just sent out a few postcards and decided they were now authorized to create a new union for a workforce that had no such union.

The SEIU has decided that in 11 states they now represent child-care providers that work out of their homes. Again, there were no meetings, there was no vote. Just some postcards.

In New York, for instance, the AP reports that this presumptuous new union organization represents 28,000 child-care providers. How did it happen? Well, see, the SEIU sent out postcards and got back 8,382 that said they wanted to join such a thing if it were to be created. So, as far as the SEIU is concerned with less than 30% of the 28,000 New York child-care providers saying it was a good idea that gives them the right to claim they are now representing ALL of the rest of them!

What gall!

Continue reading “Union Organized With Less Than 30% of ‘Employees’ Agreeing to Representation?”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Founders - Media Bias - Nancy Salvato - News - Religion - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

In Defense of Freedom

December 8, 2007 by

-By Nancy Salvato

According to “Devilstower”, a blogger on the DailyKos website, human rights are more important than national security. She explains, “Even if it was sure to be lost in a terrorist attack today, my life is not worth the Constitution. The life of my child is not worth the Constitution.” This same blogger believes that presidents Bush, Roosevelt, and Lincoln set aside their duty to uphold the constitution in exchange for the illusion of security.

“Devilstower” seems to have missed the whole idea behind instituting a constitution, which is that government is instituted to protect the peoples’ right to life, liberty and property, and the right to defend themselves against those who would rob, enslave, or kill them. This right, which the Constitution is designed to protect, is derived from Natural Law* not from the Constitution itself.

Abraham Lincoln, in his Gettysburg Address, proclaims:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that “all men are created equal.”

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it, as a final resting place for those who died here, that the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow, this ground– The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have hallowed it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here; while it can never forget what they did here.

It is rather for us, the living, to stand here, we here be dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that, from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here, gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have died in vain; that the nation, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people by the people for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

“Devilstower states, “The life of hundreds — thousands — is not worth setting aside the rights ensured to us by the Constitution. Because setting aside the Constitution is a defeat greater than any that can be delivered to us by any instrument of terror or war.” Isn’t it clear that those soldiers, of whom Lincoln spoke, gave their lives to preserve the union and to end the practice of slavery, a practice which had been under the protection of our Constitution?
Continue reading “In Defense of Freedom”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Helen Thomas Says You Bloggers are ‘Dangerous’

December 7, 2007 by 2 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

I don’t know… I don’t feel that dangerous. But, gee, I guess I am? Well I might be, at least according to Helen Thomas, one of the most uncivil “reporters” in all of journalism. Apparently she has proclaimed that citizen journalists and bloggers are “dangerous” on a HufPo blog of Dec. 4th. HufPoster Seema Kalia reported an exchange with the equine visaged Thomas where she raised alarm over her fear of the common American citizen and that terribly annoying Internet thingie. Yes, folks she thinks that if you are a blogger or Internet writer you have no sense of “ethics” and you are “Dangerous.” One wonders if she really knows any journalists at all if she thinks they show any sign of “ethics”?

Seema Kalia, relied on Thomas for her first entry in a proposed series titled “My favorite mistake” in which folks Kalia deems worthy of her focus will recount the mistake that “taught them the most.” Ostensibly this little foray into feels-goodism is meant to “teach” us all something it appears. Unfortunately for Kalia, Thomas miserably fails to give the entry any pop psychological umphf for her fist little attempt. It seems that the woman who is constantly badgering government officials to admit their mistakes has proclaimed that she, herself, has been entirely perfect since she began her career some time in the late Pleistocene period.

Helen Thomas: I don’t have any mistakes to tell you about.

No? Nothing? Not even her sense of fashion is a mistake? At least as far as she is here to tell you, anyway.

But, while the interview fails to perform to the stated purpose of making us all warm and gushy inside because our favorite personages can admit that they are fallible, it does succeed at one thing. It is a wonderful showcase of Thomas’s arrogance along with her hyper sense of paranoia.

After telling us she has never made a mistake, Thomas goes on to suspect a HufPo blogger of trying to make her look bad. Kalia tries to explain the purpose of the article to the aged scribe. “The spirit of this interview is really to explore the role of mistake-making as part of the growth of people who are really successful at what they do,” Kalia says. But Thomas is having none of it. “No, no, no…you’re looking for something else; you want people to flagellate themselves,” she suspiciously replies. To which our sycophantic HufPoster assures her that, “There are many people I’d like to see flagellated in Washington, but you are not among them.”

Of course, most of the interview is meaningless jabber, but one short exchange from this leading figure of the fossilized media establishment does reveal the same sort of arrogance that we chronicle here every day.

Continue reading “Helen Thomas Says You Bloggers are ‘Dangerous’”

00Publius Contributor - Books - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Ethics - Government Corruption - Hillary Clinton - Liberals - Media Bias - News - Progressives - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

She Still Takes a Villager — Hillary’s Authorship Lies

December 6, 2007 by 3 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

Venerable book publishers Simon and Schuster have announced that on December 12th they will be issuing a new edition of Hillary Clinton’s starry-eyed 1996 paean to socialist collectivism, It Takes a Village — starring none other than Mz. inevitability herself, Hillary Clinton. I’m sure the rafters will once again tremble with hosannas for Clinton’s “hard work” in writing the book and she will again be heralded as a wonderful stylist. All due praise will be lavished upon the former first lady, current Senator, and unsurprising candidate for the Democrat Party nomination for President of the United States of America.

Actually, I’ll have to take that back because Hillary won’t be receiving all due praise for her efforts on the book. She will be getting far, far more than she deserves. Why, you might ask? Because she wrote barely a word of the book that bears her name, that’s why. And worse, since 1996 Clinton has lied repeatedly claiming she wrote it all by herself, refusing to acknowledge that it was ghostwritten by someone else.

Still, the ersatz praise has already started. As seen on Amazon.com’s page for the book, Audiofile magazine recently said of the new edition, “For the most part, this is not the former first lady and presidential hopeful we all know. In a softer, almost neighborly voice, Clinton reveals intimate details about her childhood and the childhood of her husband.” This is really quite an observant review for the single fact that Clinton’s voice is altogether missing from the book. Of course the reason for that is that the harsh, shrill voice of the Hillary Clinton “we all know” was nowhere near the typewriter of Barbara Feinman Todd, the woman who really wrote the book.

But, where is the acknowledgment of the real writer of the book Hillary is famous for? Nowhere to be found, making Hillary more correctly infamous for the book instead of praiseworthy. A description of the book prior to the new edition’s release, one probably written by the publisher, says, “Written when Hillary Clinton was the First Lady, IT TAKES A VILLAGE acknowledges the many challenges and difficulties of raising children in America and proposes an ideal of broad community responsibility for the total upbringing of healthy and secure children. Clinton draws on her own experiences as a child, mother, and lawyer, as well as those of concerned parents, teachers, and advocates for children–and she takes the time to listen to the important lessons that children can teach adults as well.”

It’s interesting that they don’t exactly come out and say she wrote the thing, isn’t it?

Continue reading “

She Still Takes a Villager — Hillary’s Authorship Lies”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

CNN Tries a Gotcha: ‘Thompson Has no Hunting License’ But, SO WHAT!?

December 6, 2007 by 2 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

CNN has posted a Political Ticker entry trying to create a “gotcha” on 2nd Amendment supporter, Fred Thompson. CNN’s South Carolina Producer Peter Hamby has breathlessly announced that “Thompson does not have hunting license,” but the question is… so what? Do you HAVE to own a hunting license to be for the 2nd Amendment? Does Fred not owning a hunting license disqualify him as a gun rights advocate? Well, it appears that CNN imagines that you are illegitimate if you claim to support the 2nd Amendment yet you don’t have a valid hunting license. What we end up with here is proof that CNN doesn’t have a clue what it means to own a gun, what it means to support gun rights, nor do they understand the 2nd Amendment itself, or that there are various “gun cultures” and levels of interest and usage for guns in the United States.

Of course, CNN’s allusion to that claim is absurd. It is perfectly legitimate to support the 2nd Amendment without being a hunter.

Here’s CNN’s set up:

COLUMBIA, South Carolina (CNN) — Fred Thompson has made a point of visiting gun shops and gun shows while hitting the campaign trail in New Hampshire and South Carolina, usually with camera crews in tow.

And now what Hamby imagines is the strike out pitch:

But Thompson said Wednesday he does not have a hunting license, nor has be been hunting recently.

Now, anyone interested in the Constitution, history, guns as a hobby, guns as historical artifacts, target shooting, Civil War and Revolutionary War reenacting, or Cowboy shooting will know right away that CNN’s gotcha is a meaningless point to flog. All those interested in the gun hobbies and causes mentioned above have no necessary connection to hunting whatsoever. Folks who like target shooting, reenacting or history might also be hunters, but many are not. Yet they are ALL for 2nd Amendment rights, hunting or no.

Continue reading “CNN Tries a Gotcha: ‘Thompson Has no Hunting License’ But, SO WHAT!?”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - Nancy Salvato - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

Someone Is Telling the Truth but No One Is Listening

December 6, 2007 by

-By Nancy Salvato

It’s a timeless story, The Boy who cried Wolf, one I can remember reading many times as a young child perusing Aesop’s Fables long past my bedtime, while the rest of the house was sleeping. It’s a simple moral, “There is no believing a liar, even when he speaks the truth.” My love of these fables had an enduring effect; imprinting their many lessons on the direction my life has taken. Of late, it has occurred to me that many people are employing this moral to the yellow journalism that has graced the pages of our nation’s newspapers, the hyperbole which has escaped the mouths of our nation’s politicians and to the manipulation of statistics by special interest groups to draw attention to their causes.

As I read the Reuters headlines today on my Verizon LG mobile phone, my skeptical side emerged in full force. “More than º of US Birds Threatened: Report…global warming may be partially to blame”, yeah, right; “Bush vows active U.S. role for Mideast peace”, where have I heard that before?; “Cuddly Croc forces passenger off flight”, sounds like “Snakes on a Plane.” I rarely clicked to read the entire item, mentally deleting anything that didn’t sound like there was any substance to it. Every once in awhile I delved further, “Keep your shoes on: T-rays can see right through.” Hmm, that could truly be a breakthrough for medical science but I wouldn’t want airport security aiming that at my breasts.

How can one human being determine what is real and what is not? Who should a person believe? When is something really a crisis that needs to be addressed? What is a reasonable course of action? With all these roadblocks to simple, unedited facts, why (if I can borrow an overused colloquialism dating to the l980’s) wouldn’t our nation’s people be disillusioned and want to cocoon? For many, this is the path they choose, but for others who are trying to do the right thing and fulfill their civic responsibility, it is difficult to navigate through the b*#sh%t and make an informed decision. It is unlikely that they are analyzing both conservative and liberal sources of what is happening in the world and unreasonable to expect them to spend hours of their free time collecting news from around the world. No, for a great many people, they rely on a half hour broadcast which might spend 15 minutes of that time on Hollywood celebrities and sports figures. They will walk away comforted in the knowledge that they have been privy to “all the news worth knowing.” However, there are many stories to which they will never be exposed.
Continue reading “Someone Is Telling the Truth but No One Is Listening”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Media Bias - Military - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

A Case Where MSM Bias… ISN’T

December 5, 2007 by 6 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

General Keith Kerr IS a general! Our purpose here at Newsbusters is to chronicle and expose the leftist media bias that infests their coverage of the news, that is true. But, I feel compelled to also urge that our efforts be as true and guided by integrity as possible. I want to take a case that many on “our side” are taking up, claiming that it is an example of media bias and leftist “lies.” Unfortunately, it is not a good hook upon which to hang our hat because, while it may be a confusing issue, it is not an example of any bias and if we insist on making this an issue it will make us look petty and uninformed. This is the case where people are claiming that the “gay CNN general” is not really a general. In fact, if his rank is that of general in the State forces, he is and can properly be called a general everywhere he goes.

General Keith Kerr was the Hillary Clinton campaign operative that CNN planted in the GOP debates last month. There has been raised some confusion on his “real” rank. Yes it is true that his official U.S. Army rank was never higher than Colonel. It is also true that he held the rank of General in the Army of the State of California and it is also true that he has no battlefield experience.

Here is part of his bio on SDLN:
Continue reading “A Case Where MSM Bias… ISN’T”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Entertainment - Family - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

A Wizard of Oz Where Evil is Dorothy’s Fault? Ask Sci-Fi Channel!

December 5, 2007 by 3 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

As the Sci-Fi Channel’s new mini-series Tin Man comes to a close, it is sad to say that what we ended up with was a show that takes a family favorite and turns it into a dark, mangled mess not suitable for children that makes good responsible for all that is evil. It’s all a perfectly ghastly example of moral relativism and the sort of nihilism we have become so boringly used to from our current forms of entertainment.

Remember the Wicked Witch of the West in the original The Wizard of Oz? She was green and ugly, she only wanted what was bad for everyone but herself and she had the love of no one. Remember Dorothy, the pure of heart who would bring light to the land of Oz? She was beautiful and true, the personification of good. To many, the story of The Wizard of Oz was one where a plucky girl with self-confidence could beat evil and make the world a better place. But, not to the Sci-Fi channel. Noooo, in this day of cynicism we certainly can’t have a traditional tale of good vs. evil, now can we? With it’s re-imagining of the venerable children’s classic, the Sci-Fi channel’s Tin Man gives us a Wizard who is a drug addict, a Tin Man that is a bitter ex-cop, a cowardly lion that is… well, we aren’t sure what he is… a scarecrow that is a victim of a lobotomy, the dog To To as a shape shifter who betrays Dorothy, and a Wicked Witch of the West who is really Dorothy’s beautiful older sister and not “just” a witch at all. And what of Dorothy? Well, first of all, not only is she not from Kansas, she isn’t even human (She is from Oz originally, not Earth). But worst of all, the evil of the Wicked Witch of the West is all Dorothy’s fault in the first place. You read that right, evil is the fault of good in this new Oz flick.

It’s a common a trope of entertainment and literature that the existence of good is always countered by that of evil, of course. There have also been many times when good and evil are personified in relatives, such as the brothers of the Bible, Caine and Abel; the good son and the bad. For the most part, though, we’ve had a literary tradition of good triumphing over evil, even if it might mean relatives somehow vanquishing each other. Naturally, the theme of brother against brother, or son against father, and vice versa is meant to add even more tragedy and pathos to the story, but evil is still usually evil.

But, these days it seems that Hollywood and the creators of our forms of entertainment feel they are somehow beyond the traditional roles of good and evil. These writers simply cannot stomach an evil character that just IS evil, nor can the good really just be good. Just as the new version of Beowulf at theaters today makes Beowulf the good and pure hero into a braggart and liar and his enemy into a misunderstood grotesquerie, this new Wizard of Oz suffers from that refusal to make good, good and evil, evil. In today’s entertainment, evil must always be explained away. It’s all not so bad, these stories tell us, evil is just misunderstood.

Continue reading “A Wizard of Oz Where Evil is Dorothy’s Fault? Ask Sci-Fi Channel!”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Frederick Meekins - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Uncategorized

TSA To Rummage Through Emotional Baggage As Well

December 5, 2007 by

-By Frederick Meekins

On an episode of South Park taking aim at the airline industry, Mr. Garrison (still a man at that point) invented a mode of transportation where riders had to have a metal prod inserted into their backsides in order to avoid falling off the vehicle. The response of those enduring such discomfort and humiliation was that it was still less than what passengers had to endure at the airport. While the bit might have been a bit over the top in terms of propriety, it was pretty much on target in terms of how most Americans feel regarding the bureaucratic procedures implemented in the name of “transportation security” since September 11th.

As fairly good natured people content with the social order even if they don’t like the way the process is handled, most Americans deciding to utilize this form of transportation simply keep their comments to themselves and bear with the frustration. However, according to a McClatchy newspapers article titled “New Airport Check For Danger In Fliers’ Facial Expressions“, it may no longer be enough to stoically endure these indignations but one must also have a smile on one’s face about it.

A new specialty within the Transportation Security Administration known as Behavior Detection Officers (one could not devise a more Orwellian sounding division of the government if one tried) has been given the mandate to scrutinize those exhibiting unapproved facial expressions

If proponents of the theory get their way, certain facial expressions revealing whether an individual is feeling anger or disgust and, when taken together with heart rate, body temperature, and verbal responses, will be enough to get passengers shunted aside for further forms of interrogation such as having their baggage rifled through or being asked where they are going.
Continue reading “TSA To Rummage Through Emotional Baggage As Well”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Religion - Society/Culture - Uncategorized - Warner Todd Huston

Misrepresenting Morality

December 4, 2007 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Apparently, Time Magazine has no idea what the definition of the word “morality” is. It is also certain that they don’t understand the concepts inherent in it as is evident in a recent feature titled “The Morality Quiz,” where Time shows that they imagine that all there is to morality is life or death decisions resulting in sacrificing one person to save multiple others. Using decades old false dilemma questions engineered to elicit the conclusion that there is no such thing as a black and white moral choice, Time attempts to prove that Americans are either soulless killers or weaklings. Worse, as far as Time is concerned they imagine that the “foundation” of morality is mere “empathy,” meaning that the most important aspect of morality is “feeling” for others as opposed to societal exigencies or religious precepts. Confusingly, it’s also all a matter of kill or be killed to Time Magazine, which certainly takes all the messy “right” and “wrong” stuff out of the equation, eh?

In their opening statement, Time’s quiz ignores the societal aspects of morality to focus on empathy. “The deepest foundation on which morality is built,” Time begins, “is the phenomenon of empathy, the understanding that what hurts me would feel the same way to you.” It seems to me, however, that empathy isn’t the basis of morality, but that self-interest is. It isn’t what hurts others that keeps us mindful of morality, but how a violation of that morality would hurt ourselves. If we break with morality, it will come back to hurt us through societal opprobrium, so we are mindful to uphold our moral precepts.

Time also imagines that animals have just as much morality as man. “And human ego notwithstanding, it’s a quality other species share.” Well, one can understand why Time imagines that animals share man’s morality since they only define morality as a kill or be killed societal question. But, morality is far more complicated than that, isn’t it?

From there Time urges readers to take their quiz to “see how you compare to other TIME.com readers,” and they assure us all that their quiz reveals how “scientists” use these “dilemmas to study morality.”

The quiz is filled with stark dilemmas that really have little to do with concepts of morality and more to do with reactions to life or death situations. Certainly how we deal with death is guided by morality — or can be — but reactions to these extreme situations do not measure much of importance nor does it say much about what we as a society think of morality and what is moral.

Continue reading “Misrepresenting Morality”