Daily Archives: October 5th, 2008

Last Chance — For Life

Near the end of a town hall meeting in Johnstown, Pa., a woman arose to offer a passionate plea to Barack Obama to “stop these abortions.”

Obama’s response was cool, direct, unequivocal.

“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old. … I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

“Punished with a baby.”

Obama sees an unwanted pregnancy as a cruel and punitive sanction for a teenager who has made a mistake, and abortion as the way out, the road to absolution and redemption.

The contrast with Sarah Palin could not be more stark. At the birth of her son Trig, who has Down syndrome, Gov. Palin said: “We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives.

“We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed.”

Between the convictions and values of Palin and those of Barack, then, there is a world of difference. In the culture war that is rooted in religious faith, they are on opposite sides of the dividing line.

But more crucial than their conflicting beliefs is the political reality. This election is America’s last hope to reverse Roe v. Wade. Upon its outcome will rest the life, or death, of millions of unborn children. The great social cause of the Catholic Church and the Knights of Columbus, of the Evangelical and Pentecostal churches, of the entire right-to-life movement, hangs today in the balance.

Why? It is not just that Obama is a pro-choice absolutist who defends the grisly procedure known as partial-birth abortion, who backs a Freedom of Choice Act to abolish every restriction in every state, who even opposed a born-alive infant protection act.

Nor is it because Joe Biden is a NARAL Catholic who has been admonished by bishops not to take communion because he has, through his career, supported a women’s “right” to abortion, the exercise of which right has ended the lives of 45 million unborn.

Nor is it even because McCain professes to be pro-life, or Gov. Palin is a woman who not only talks the talk but walks the walk of life.

No. The reason this election is the last chance for life is the Supreme Court. For it alone — given the cowardice of a Congress that refuses to restrict its authority — has the power to reverse Roe, and because that court may be within a single vote of doing so.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Sam Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts appear steeled to overturn Roe and return this most divisive issue since slavery to the states, where it resided until January 1973.

And John Paul Stevens, the oldest and perhaps most pro-choice justice at 88, is a likely retiree in the next four years. And there is a possibility Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at 75, a survivor of cancer, could depart as did Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Thus, in the first term of the next president, there is a strong probability that one or two of the most pro-Roe justices will leave the bench. Replacement of even one of these two liberal activists with a jurist who has a Scalia-Roberts-Alito-Thomas record on the U.S. appellate court could initiate a challenge to Roe, and its rapid reversal.

Not only would that decision be a stunning perhaps irreversible victory for the pro-life cause, it would return the issue of abortion to Congress and the states, where numerous legislators are prepared to curtail if not outlaw abortion on demand in America.

Overturning Roe would re-energize the right-to-life movement in every state. In some, like California and New York, where it could not wholly prevail, some restrictions — i.e., no abortions after viability — might be imposed. Requirements such as for parental notification before a teenager has an abortion and that pregnant women be informed of what the procedure means and the trauma that often follows could be written into law.

If Roe goes, all things are possible. If Roe remains, all is lost.

Is there any certainty that John McCain, who set up the Gang of 14 to give Democrats veto over the most conservative of Bush judges, would nominate an Alito or a Roberts? No.

But there is a certainty that a President Obama would move swiftly to replace a Stevens or Ginsberg, or any other justice who steps downs or dies, with a pro-choice jurist. For support for Roe v. Wade is a litmus test in today’s Democratic Party, where the right to an abortion has been elevated to the highest rank in the Constitution.

Bottom line. If Obama-Biden wins, Roe is forever. If McCain-Palin wins, Roe could be gone by the decade’s end.

As Catholics are the swing voters who likely will decide this election, one awaits the moral counsel of the Catholic hierarchy.


<!–
// ValueParameters
ValueHost = “hs0005565″;
ValueLoaded = false;
ValueID = “pagebuster”;
ValueVersion = “1.2″;
ValueBannerType = “std”;
var ValueWidths_Heights = new Array(“107×53″);

ValueNoText = 1;
ValueBannerSizeOrder = “listed”;

//–>

<!–
if (ValueLoaded) ValueShowAd();
//–>
<A HREF=”http://ads.he.valueclick.net/redirect?host=hs0005565&t=std&b=indexpage&noscript=1&v=0;msizes=107×53;bso=listed” TARGET=”_top”><IMG BORDER=”0″ WIDTH=”107″ HEIGHT=”53″ ALT=”Click here to visit our sponsor” SRC=”http://ads.he.valueclick.net/cycle?host=hs0005565&t=std&b=indexpage&noscript=1;msizes=107×53;bso=listed”></A>

MoveObjectContents(‘tempprintsponsor’,'printsponsor’);

if (!_THATLASPAGEID) {var _THATLASPAGEID = new Number(Math.floor(99999999*Math.random())+1);}
document.writeln(“<SC” + “RIPT TYPE=’text/javascript’ SRC=’http://ads.townhall.com/jserver/site=TOWNHALL/area=Townhall.Web/POSITION=TOWN_RECT/PAGEID=” + _THATLASPAGEID + “/RANDOM=” + new Number(Math.floor(99999999*Math.random())+1) + “‘></SCR” + “IPT>”);
&lt;a href=”http://ads.townhall.com/accipiter/adclick/CID=00017b566d4b0d8d00000000/site=TOWNHALL/area=Townhall.Web/POSITION=TOWN_RECT/PAGEID=6619711/RANDOM=8446128/AAMGEOIP=216.16.7.48″&gt; &lt;img src=”http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/creative/oldmmad2.swf” alt=”" width=”300″ height=”250″ border=”0″&gt; &lt;/a&gt; <a href=”http://ads.townhall.com/accipiter/adclick/CID=00017b566d4b0d8d00000000/site=TOWNHALL/area=Townhall.Web/POSITION=TOWN_RECT/PAGEID=6619711/RANDOM=8446128/AAMGEOIP=216.16.7.48″> <img src=”http://media.salemwebnetwork.com/creative/oldmmad2.swf” alt=”" width=”300″ height=”250″ border=”0″> </a>

This November’s Top 10 Initiatives
Paul Jacob
Sunday, October 05, 2008

President Bush and Congress just agreed to borrow $700 billion to bailout insolvent financial firms. Your share in this wager is $2,292.60. For a family of four that comes to $9,170.40

And you didn’t get to vote on it.

If you’re unhappy about that, you get to choose from two major party candidates for president who both voted for the bailout. (All the minor party and independent candidates, both left and right, were against the bailout.)

Compare our federal dysfunction to the menu of real choices awaiting voters at the state and local level — especially in the 24 states that enjoy a process of initiative and referendum.

Here’s my list of the Top 10 issues on state ballots this November:

10. Washington State I-985, The Reduce Traffic Congestion Initiative. The Seattle area is home to some the nation’s most horrendous traffic. This initiative promises to kick out those jams by requiring synchronized traffic lights, opening up high-occupancy-vehicle lanes and mandating a higher proportion of current funds be spent to reduce road congestion.

The measure is promoted by the state’s leading initiative activist, Tim Eyman, who has passed eight initiatives in the last ten years — to enact tax cuts, spending restraints and produce performance audits of government. I-985 is ahead in early polling. If it passes and succeeds in easing gridlock, frustrated commuters in other initiative states will want to travel this same route.

9. Colorado Amendment 46, Civil Rights Initiative. Ward Connerly’s efforts to end racial and gender preferences — so-called “affirmative action” programs — have been fiercely fought. Yet, the measures have won in every state where voters have gotten to choose: California, Michigan and Washington. Though campaigns of harassment against petitioners in Arizona, Missouri and Oklahoma helped block the idea from gaining a spot on those state ballots, the issue will be voted on in Colorado and Nebraska. It is expected to pass in both states.

8. California Proposition 4, Abortion Waiting Period and Parental Notification. Prop 4 requires a minor to wait 48 hours after a physician notifies a parent – or in the case of alleged parental abuse, an adult relative – before an abortion can be performed. Similar measures in 2005 and 2006 failed, but those initiatives lacked the alternative of notifying a relative rather than a parent. The third time may be a charm — a recent Field Poll shows the measure narrowly ahead.

Abortion is also at issue in Colorado, with Amendment 48, which defines “personhood” as beginning at “the moment of fertilization,” and in South Dakota, with Initiated Measure 11, a ban on all abortions, except in the case of rape, incest or a threat to the mother’s life.

7. Massachusetts Ballot Question 2, The Sensible Marijuana Policy Initiative. This measure would make the possession of less than an ounce of marijuana a civil offense, punishable by a $100 fine, rather than a criminal offense. In an interesting twist, it appears that 11 district attorneys broke Massachusetts campaign finance laws by spending money against this measure before forming their Coalition to Save Our Streets. Campaign finance laws are so byzantine that even the DAs can’t follow them.

Michigan voters will decide Proposal 1, a measure to permit the medicinal use of marijuana, and Californians face Prop 5, the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act, which would move the state even further toward a policy of treatment, rather than incarceration, for drug offenses.

6. Arkansas Proposed Initiated Act 1, Unmarried Couple Adoption Ban. This statutory measure bans unmarried couples from adopting children or serving as foster parents. State government policy had restricted same-sex couples from becoming adoptive or foster parents, until the policy was challenged by the ACLU and overturned. This initiative would set a broader state policy whereby no unmarried couples – heterosexual or homosexual – could adopt children or be foster parents.

If it passes, it is likely to be repeated in other states. If it fails, along with likely failures of same-sex marriage bans in California and elsewhere, sexual orientation politics may begin a new chapter.

Arizona’s Proposition 102 currently leads in the polls, but is relatively close. It’s similar to Proposition 107, which in 2006 became the first same-sex marriage ban to be defeated by voters in any state. But Proposition 102, unlike its predecessor, doesn’t prohibit domestic partnerships or civil unions. Marriage amendments also face tough tests in California, where Prop 8 is far behind, in part due to a controversial ballot title by Attorney General Jerry Brown, and in Florida, where Amendment 2 is polling well over a majority but short of the 60 percent super-majority now required for enacting state amendments.

5. Colorado Amendment 47, Right to Work. This amendment would allow any employee in a unionized Colorado workplace to freely choose whether or not to join the union. It is now being opposed by a united big business/labor coalition with a campaign war-chest of nearly $15 million, after a long negotiated deal whereby business interests agreed to help fund the campaign against this measure in exchange for organized labor withdrawing four initiatives (Amendments 53, 55, 56, and 57) that would have tilted policy toward labor.

The business/labor coalition is also opposing Amendment 49, which stops state and local government from deducting union dues from employees’ paychecks, and Amendment 54, which prevents recipients of government no-bid contracts (totaling $100,000 or more) from making political contributions.

Colorado was poised for a fierce battle between business and labor interests until last week’s agreement. Now, these three measures face a multi-million dollar onslaught from the state’s most powerful political players.

4. North Dakota Measure 2, A Corporate and Personal Income Tax Cut. Proposed by the North Dakota chapter of Americans for Prosperity, this statutory initiative would reduce state income tax for individuals by 50 percent and the corporate income tax by 15 percent. Former Governor Ed Schafer has endorsed the initiative, while the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) and the North Dakota Farm Bureau oppose it.

A different tax battle rages next door, where the Minnesota Sales Tax Amendment, referred to the ballot by legislators, would raise the sales tax rate by 3/8ths of a cent to fund natural resource protection and cultural heritage programs. The Taxpayers League of Minnesota is leading the opposition, along with the state Chamber of Commerce and Farm Bureau.

These two states may help set the mood on taxes as economic times get rougher. But a number of other tax measures await voters in other states. For instance, Arizonans will face the “Majority Rules Initiative,” Proposition 105, that would require any initiative increasing taxes or requiring greater spending to be passed not just by a majority of those voting, but by a majority of all registered voters, a nearly impossible threshold to reach. Maine voters may veto Governor Baldacci’s tax increase on beer, wine and soft drinks to fund the Dirigo Health Choice program, after citizens collected enough signatures to force a referendum. Massachusetts voters can, though likely won’t, repeal their state income tax via Question 1. Oregonians will decide whether to allow state income taxpayers to fully deduct their federal income taxes ala Measure 59.

3. South Dakota Initiated Measure 10, The Open and Clean Government Act, would prevent the use of public funds for any “campaign, lobbying, or partisan purposes.” The measure prevents those who receive no-bid state contracts from making political contributions to the politicians awarding them the contract. Measure 10 also blocks the current practice of laundering tax dollars through county and municipal associations and other tax-supported groups to then be used in ballot measure campaigns and lobbying efforts.

Not surprisingly, the South Dakota Association of County Commissioners, supported by tax dollars from each of the 66 counties in the state, is opposing the initiative. Both the state’s Republican and Democratic parties also urge a No vote on Measure 10.

2. California Proposition 7, Renewable Energy Generation. This statutory measure, known as “Big Solar,” would require utilities to generate 20 percent of their power from renewable energy by 2010, 40 percent by 2020 and 50 percent by 2025. Supporters claim it will make California a leader in renewable energy and improve the environment. Opponents say it will cost consumers dearly in higher utility rates and could be counter-productive in developing renewable energy.

A July Field Poll found Californians largely unaware of the measure, but 63 percent were supportive compared to 24 percent against it. However, opponents, with help from PG&E and Edison, will have the funds to get their message to voters.

Another California measure, Prop 10, sometimes called “Big Wind,” would provide $5 billion in bond money to subsidize alternative fuels. Missouri voters will decide Proposition C, which, similar to California’s Prop 7, would mandate that 15 percent of the energy generated or purchased by investor-owned utilities be from renewable sources.

1. Constitutional Convention Calls in Connecticut, Hawaii and Illinois. Eleven states require that voters automatically be asked whether to call a constitutional convention to consider amendments and revisions to the state’s constitution every ten or 20 years. This year a question appears on the ballot in Connecticut, Hawaii and Illinois.

These questions tend to fail by significant margins, but with voters so thoroughly dissatisfied, that might change this year. Grassroots campaigns to win a Yes vote have sprung up in all three states. Campaigns against holding a convention have organized, too, funded by powerful business and labor interests in each state.

In Connecticut and Illinois, there are two striking features of the campaigns in favor of a convention. First, the coalitions include anti-tax conservatives alongside social justice advocates. Second, this broad coalition doesn’t speak of enacting their diverse agendas. Instead, the main focus is on obtaining a statewide process of voter initiative and referendum (and in Illinois’ case, recall, too). These voter-powered reforms are seen as the critical step to making government in some way accountable to the public.

Back in the summer, a poll showed the Illinois constitutional convention question ahead, but the opposition is much better funded and organized. And the measure must garner a supermajority, 60 percent of the vote, in order to prevail.

In Connecticut, the last time a question was on the ballot it got creamed, 3 to 1. Still, there is strong support for allowing voter initiatives, and the convention is arguably the best way to enact that process. Recently, Republican Governor Jodi Rell endorsed a Yes vote on the convention, for just that reason.

We may not always like our choices, but we want to make more of them — to have more control over our government. Though no process is ever perfect, this November’s 61 statewide initiatives and referenda, along with another 84 measures referred to state ballots by legislators, give voters more say.

That’s a step in the right direction.

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

if (sWinHTML.toLowerCase().indexOf(“<table”) > -1)
{
//alert(“hidden”);
document.getElementById(“bottomDivForAd1″).innerHTML = document.getElementById(“divForAd1″).innerHTML;
document.getElementById(“divForAd1″).style.display = “none”; //.visibility = “hidden”;
document.getElementById(“divForAd1″).innerHTML=”";
}
else
{
//alert(“visible”);
document.getElementById(“divForAd1″).style.display = “inline”;
}
var gDcsId=’UA-404425-3′

PERSONALLY I HATE COMMUNISTS, FASCISTS,  LIBERALS, ANARCHISTS. DON’T HAVE ANY USE FOR LIBERALS WHO THREATEN MY RIGHTS.  ESPECIALLY THE FIRST AND SECOND AMENDMENTS.  I HAVE NO USE FOR BOTH THE THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT AND THE RELIGIOUS LEFT.
Nutty Professor
Sunday, Sep 28, 2008 – 12:05 AM

Presidents have vast influence in certain areas, such as foreign affairs, and their positions on those subjects command attention because their views could shape history. In other areas, presidents have considerably less influence. But their views matter still, because the positions they take give insight into their political philosophy, the premises from which they begin any consideration of public policy. Guns offer a perfect example.

John McCain — who picked a gleefully gun-totin’ running mate — is not a gun-rights absolutist. Among other things, he has supported bans on inexpensive handguns, favored requiring safety locks on firearms, and suggested the GOP should be open to closing the gun-show loophole.

Yet McCain’s general approach favors (a) preserving Second Amendment rights for law-abiding gun owners and (b) stiffer penalties for lawbreakers. He has opposed assault-rifle bans as well as nonsensical lawsuits seeking to hold gun manufacturers responsible for individual acts of gun violence. “Neither justice nor domestic peace [is] served by holding the innocent responsible for the acts of the criminal,” he says.

. . .

And then there is Barack Obama — who said earlier this year that poor, rural Americans “cling to” guns like a security blanket.

The Democrat seems to have undergone a campaign conversion — he now claims to have “no intention of taking away folks’ guns.” But he frequently describes restrictions on gun ownership as “common sense,” and his statements supporting gun rights often come with a “but.” His record suggests a deep and strongly felt antipathy to gun rights. Rare is the anti-gun measure he has voted against.

He also takes pains to avoid saying he would oppose on principle even the most extreme gun-control proposals. Instead, he says they aren’t politically viable. A complete ban on handguns? That is “not politically practicable.” Take away the family deer rifle? “Even if I wanted to take it away, I couldn’t get it done. I don’t have the votes in Congress.” Licensing all firearms ownership? “I just don’t think we can get that done.” He has supported licensing all handgun owners, though, and in 2004 Obama backed national legislation forbidding anyone but law-enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms, even with a license.

A Dec. 13, 1999, article in the Chicago Defender reported on an appearance at an anti-gun rally at which “Obama outlined his anti-gun plan [including] banning the sale of firearms at gun shows except ‘antique’ weapons” — as well as (a) banning gun stores from any location within five miles of a school or a park, (b) banning inexpensive pistols, and (c) charging a homeowner with a felony if a weapon stolen from his home is used to cause harm, if the weapon was not properly secured.

In the wake of the Heller decision striking down D.C.’s handgun ban, Obama said he has “always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but . . . .” Last November he said the D.C. gun law was constitutional.

If a political candidate said he acknowledged a First Amendment right to free expression, but had supported seemingly every attempt at censorship that had ever crossed his path, it would be fair to call him disingenuous. If a professor of constitutional law did the same thing, it would be fair to call him something worse. Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago.

Go Back


– Part of the GatewayVa Network –
webmaster@inrich.com

Running from the truth in Paris, Texas

October 4, 2008 at 3:25 pm (Uncategorized)

From Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune comes another tale of small-town racism. There are two questions surrounding the tragic death of Brandon McClelland of Paris, Texas.  One, was his killing racially motivated?  If Witt has it right, the answer is an unambiguous yes. Which brings us to the second question: why are the local prosecutor and the Department of Safety (Texas state police) saying it ain’t so? Paris, like Tulia and Jasper, is a Texas town that never got the memo on civil rights.  Crude Jim Crow segregation can be ended quickly by judicial fiat; but hearts and minds change at a glacial pace. This story rubs up against the savage, prison-based subculture of white supremacy.  Local officials are hoping that if they refuse to ask any questions they can avoid the messy answers. Thank you, Mr. Witt, for making that a little harder.

Killing in a small town raises hate crime fears

By Howard Witt | Tribune correspondent October 5, 2008 PARIS, Texas – When the mutilated and partially dismembered body of Brandon McClelland, a 24-year-old black man, turned up lying in the middle of a rural east Texas road one morning last month, the police immediately pronounced the case a hit-and-run by an unknown driver. Within a few days, however, suspicions turned toward two white friends who had picked up McClelland in their truck a few hours before he was found dead early on Sept. 16. Despite signs that the truck had been washed, authorities discovered blood and other physical evidence on the undercarriage and arrested the two men, both with long criminal histories, for murder. Now this small, racially divided town–already seared with a racist label by civil rights groups last year over differences in how blacks and whites were treated by the local justice system–is on edge yet again, wondering if it’s got a horrific new hate crime on its hands. The district attorney insists race had nothing to do with McClelland’s death and police investigators are portraying the case as an apparent falling-out among friends. But McClelland’s relatives and Paris civil rights leaders are less certain. Citing the violence done to McClelland’s body and reports that one of the alleged assailants, Shannon Finley, had white supremacist ties, they are demanding that Paris authorities investigate the case as a possible hate crime akin to the infamous 1998 lynching of James Byrd Jr., in Jasper, Texas, 250 miles south of here. Byrd was dragged to his death behind a pickup truck by three white supremacists who were later convicted of murder. McClelland was walking in front of the pickup when Finley, 27, and a friend, Charles Ryan Crostley, 27, who was also arrested, allegedly ran him down and then dragged him 40 feet along the road until his mutilated body popped out from beneath the chassis, according to a police affidavit accompanying the warrant for Finley’s arrest. “If you take somebody out to the country like that in the middle of the night and do that to him in that way, that’s how they do black people around here,” said Brenda Cherry, a local activist working with McClelland’s family. “To me, it smells like Jasper.” Paris’ race relations came under withering national scrutiny last year after the Tribune reported the case of Shaquanda Cotton, a 14-year-old African-American youth who was sentenced by a local judge to up to seven years in a youth prison for shoving a hall monitor at her high school. Just three months earlier, the same judge had sentenced a 14-year-old white girl to probation after convicting her of the more serious crime of arson for burning down her family’s house. The discrepancy in the treatment of the two teenagers provoked protests from national civil rights groups and led to Cotton’s early release from prison. Now McClelland’s family fears that Paris officials, eager to protect their city of 26,000 from another round of negative publicity over race relations, are purposefully downplaying potential racial overtones in McClelland’s murder. “At the crime scene, it looked like these boys went back and poured beer on my son’s body,” said Jacqueline McClelland, Brandon’s mother. “Two beer cans were lying out there, but the police didn’t even pick them up, they just left evidence out there. They won’t even consider the racial issues. That’s the way it is in Paris.” Even the editor of the local newspaper, normally an impassioned defender of Paris’ reputation, has cautioned law enforcement officials to be thorough and “leave no stone unturned” in their investigation. “Hopefully, this community has learned from its past,” Mary Madewell wrote in the Paris News. “… Even if our worst fears prove to be true, let us realize that the actions of single individuals should in no way bring condemnation to an entire community.” Family members and other critics are also concerned about the impartiality of Lamar County District Atty. Gary Young, who five years ago, before he was elected prosecutor, served as Finley’s court-appointed defense attorney when Finley pleaded guilty to manslaughter for shooting a friend to death. Young has declined to state whether he will recuse himself and other prosecutors in his office from handling the McClelland case. Although the victim in Finley’s 2003 manslaughter case was white, race played a role in the incident. Finley told police he was sitting in a pickup with his friend in a park when two gun-wielding black men supposedly walked up alongside and tried to rob them. Finley said he grabbed his friend’s handgun and fired at the robbers, but instead shot his friend. An autopsy determined that the victim suffered three gunshot wounds to the head, but the district attorney at the time accepted Finley’s contention that the shooting was an accident and offered him a plea bargain on a reduced manslaughter charge. Finley served three years of a 4-year prison sentence. The alleged robbers were never found. That manslaughter case also tied Finley and McClelland closely together. McClelland furnished a false alibi for Finley, testifying before a grand jury that Finley was with him at the time the shooting occurred. That lie under oath earned McClelland a conviction for aggravated perjury, for which he served two years in prison. Largely because of that connection between McClelland and Finley, police discount the possibility that race played a part in McClelland’s death. “I don’t see how it was racial, being as how they were good friends,” said Stacy McNeal, the Texas Ranger who is the lead investigator on the case. But McClelland’s relatives say they have heard that Finley fell in with white supremacists while in prison and that he had grown upset over Brandon’s overtures to a white girl–factors they say the police ought to investigate. “I always told Brandon that Finley was bad news and he should stay away from him,” said Ervin Barry, a friend of McClelland’s. “But Brandon thought they were good friends.” Race relations in Paris, Texas: An update SHAQUANDA COTTON: The black high school freshman whose sentence of up to seven years in prison for shoving a school hall monitor drew national scrutiny to the town’s justice system was released from prison in March 2007. Now 17, she is studying for her GED certificate and hopes to attend junior college. TASK FORCE: Citizens concerned about racial fissures in town exposed by the Cotton case convened a local Diversity Task Force, which has held several meetings and last month hosted a community-wide block party attended by several hundred residents. INVESTIGATION: The U.S. Department of Education last month concluded a two-year investigation of allegedly discriminatory disciplinary policies in the Paris public schools. The agency said it found “insufficient evidence to support a conclusion” that black students were being disciplined more harshly than whites. hwitt@tribune.com

Person Howard Witt

Got this one from an Okie friend of mine–she is good people–and I thought it was good enough to pass on.


Barack Obama has put out an ad that simple minded John McCain cannot use a computer.

Well guess what?

Barack cannot land a jet plane on an aircraft carrier at night.

Detecting Real HeroesBy Barry Rubin

In Raymond Chandler’s essay, “The Simple Act of Murder,” he describes the character of the detective as he was to appear in the great stories that lent themselves to “film noir.” Implicitly he was also defining the American hero — and who your heroes are tells a great deal about you and your society.
There are more than a few parts of the world where the hero is the terrorist or the martyr, often the same person nowadays. The ability to kill lots of people and the willingness to die are deemed to equate with greatness. This is a concept that often goes with dictatorships and ideological societies. Softness and kindness are weaknesses in such places, after all.
Similar yet different are the socialist realist heroes beloved of Communist states, cardboard cut-outs, persons of perfection, a sort of tractor mechanism inside the form of man.
Americans like their heroes flawed but not shattered. It’s good for the hero to be reluctant. After all, the first hero of America, or at least of the United States as a country, was George Washington, who was modeled on Cincinnatus, the Roman paragon who left his plow, served its country in its time of need, and then went back to the plow.  He wasn’t thirsty for power, he wasn’t the servant of the state, he was a guy (or gal) who wanted to live normally but understood that to do so required some pretty tough fighting, bargaining, scheming, or whatever to get there.
That’s why Rick of Casablanca is a great American fictional hero, and why the sheriff in “High Noon” is not like the Sheriff of Nottingham. Neither born great nor seeking greatness or wealth or power, the opportunity to be heroic had to be thrust on him.
But these are not that creature so prevalent in recent years, the anti-hero. As a spice or for variety’s sake, anti-heroes are fine but when they displace the competition a society is in real trouble. The anti-hero is not heroic, merely the main character. Such a person can be a rat, a louse, a criminal, a drug dealer or a double-dealer. Being young and handsome (or beautiful) can be sufficient to redeem them. So is the fact that they are better than the rest.
A pirate fighting demons; a nicer gangster battling a less charming one, that’s enough to give you something to cheer for in this type of drama. After all, in our times we are told by the professional tellers that there are no heroes, everyone is dirty, corrupt and vile. After all, isn’t society that way?
Someone who appears moral is, of course, instantly identifiable as corrupt. In a television show, film, or whatever, if a sincere religious believer (except for a Muslim) or a clergyman appears, you know he is stealing from the poor box. That stereotype holds and you can tell from the start who the villains are. A property developer? Oh, no! A corporate executive? Obviously the murderer. A Republican or conservative? Oh, it must be a horror film.
But Rick or the sheriff aren’t too political. Self-mockingly, Rick declares his ideology to be that of the drunkard. We like self-deprecation. After all, a hero isn’t supposed to be someone better than you but rather someone you could be. That’s democracy. Equal opportunity for heroism, if one only has the moral fiber.
Thus Chandler writes, “Down these mean streets a man must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid.” Unlike today’s anti-heroes he or she must be able to deal with the corrupt without being corrupt. Yet being a nice guy alone is insufficient. You can’t just reason with the villains. You have to intimidate them and even bop them sometimes.
Well, no one’s perfect and the whole point of the American hero is that ordinariness, that non-perfection. We are cynical and skeptical but not about doing right but only about being totally right.
And after all, what could be  more essentially hypocritical than putting the emphasis on people saying the right things — jumping through hoops of “approved” language, correctness, and never giving offense to anyone — rather than doing the right things.
If someone starts bragging, you know their coinage doesn’t ring true. That’s why it is hard to be a heroic politician, someone who constantly toots his own horn and yet is the genuine article. That’s why a good sense of humor, to show you don’t take yourself too seriously, is a prerequisite. Chandler calls it, “rude wit, a lively sense of the grotesque.”
So Chandler says:
“He must be a complete man and a common man and yet an unusual man. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a man of honor, by instinct, by inevitability, without thought of it, and certainly without saying it.”
“He is a common man or he could not go among common people. He has a sense of character, or he would not know his job,” says Chandler. Americans respect common sense. “Oh,” as a song in “Damn Yankees,” goes, “It’s fine to be a genius of course,” but you still have to put the horse in front of the cart. Anti-intellectualism is not one of Americans’ nicer traits. When you see what intellectuals act like and even think like, though, can you blame them?
Honor here does not take the form of a touchy self-regard but a deeply inbuilt sense of right and wrong. “He will take no man’s money dishonestly and no man’s insolence without a due and dispassionate revenge.” A “due and dispassionate” one because he doesn’t lose his head but keeps a sense of what makes sense, of the goal to be achieved. The frontier and pioneer character has been much demeaned in recent times as that of wild cowboys, vigilantes, a lust for violence. Nobody lasted very long on the frontier with that type of behavior.
The real basis of American character is less the cowboy but rather the homesteader, that steady person who better give first regard to family and stability. To survive required all those virtues that makes a society great but doesn’t necessarily make for a good action movie or a yuppie fantasy.
High society — whether of the opera-and-ballet with top hat variety skewered in Marx Brothers’ films or the snobbery of a self-styled intellectual-cultural elite — has no appeal for such a person. He or she isn’t trying to be a social climber. Never forget, there’s a difference between a celebrity and a hero.
Rather, says Chandler, the hallmark is “disgust for sham, and contempt for pettiness.” Yes, a lot of this does come in reaction against European airs. The idea of appealing to Europeans-a characteristic recommended in a couple of recent Democratic presidential nominees as proving them worthy of election-is not high in the priority list.
Yet if Mrs. Peabody or Mrs. Teasdale or Mr. Potter wants to look down on him or her, the hero — comic or charismatic — says all the better. The Teasdales of today aren’t so much debutantes and the Potters not so much capitalists, rather the credentials they flash are from, say — to pick something at random, Harvard Law School — and jobs whose descriptions are as empty as the payment is high — community outreach director for a hospital, perhaps.
Ironically, the left has forgotten about social class. Its old idea was to side with the salt of the earth, working stiffs, people who labored to support their families. It wasn’t important that they had good taste in clothes, drank gourmet coffee, were thin as possible, or had read big books. The people, yes, as Carl Sandburg put it in his milder populist progressive way.
When the peasantry and proletariat didn’t make the revolution and instead turned into rural folk and suburb-dwellers, however, the elements of the upper middle class that hated the bourgeoisie turned on those who were to be their foot soldiers (or less politely, cannon fodder). They saw them as grubby folk who clung to guns, religions, and bigotry. They didn’t understand that not everyone can — or, for goodness sakes — should be a professor or performance artist.
Society, especially democratic society, needs people who live by a clearly defined moral code, often atop a bedrock of a personal, not aggressive, religious faith. A minority can do drugs, mock the system, and engage in situational ethics and Hollywood-style morality. But if the majority doesn’t have family values, forget it.
These are the kind of people who serve in the military, risk their lives, endure torture as prisoners if that befalls them, and work the tough jobs. Or, to pick an example at random, such a person might be a mother who works her way up from the PTA to a governorship by raising five kids and choosing to have a baby with serious problems. Where one side sees a living being, the other sees a burden.
They are the store clerks who don’t get the big break and become rock stars. They are the insurance salespeople, the factory workers, the businesspeople on a big or small scale, the truck drivers, and all the rest. If they don’t get glamor they should at least get respect.
In the Communist bloc, they used to tell a joke about the uprisings against the “people’s dictatorships. When the spirit of Lenin is consulted about how to put down these “counterrevolutionary” revolts he considers the answer simple: “Arm the workers!” The joke is, of course that it is precisely the workers who are the ones already in the streets storming the barricades.
The situation is most apt for today’s “progressives” for whom the masses of actual Americans are the menace, often a bigger menace than foreign dictators or radical Islamist terrorists. At least the latter are exotic and have a sense of style. In the matter of choosing one’s downtrodden, it is best they be as far away as possible lest they use the wrong fork.
The irony is that if you are handed high-paying jobs, have offices given you on a silver platter, and get by on credentials and sneering at those who don’t have them, you are going to develop your ability to deal with the real world to a far lesser degree. Chandler knew better about what you learned outside the ivory tower and the golden cocoon. His detective, “has a range of awareness that startles you, but it belongs to him by right, because it belongs to the world he lives in.”
Who do you want to have next to you in a foxhole, or the White House, or in a tough situation? The wise, explains the saying, solve the problems that the smart create. If you need a refresher course in that one, see, “The Caine Mutiny,” “Casablanca,” or “High Noon.” Equally good or even better, read a lot of history.
Or, in Chandler’s words: “If there were enough like him, I think the world would be a very safe place to live in, and yet not too dull to be worth living in.” And if there aren’t enough, if those virtues are no longer valued, if the most basic survival instincts and lessons of centuries are ridiculed, watch out!

10 Comments on “Detecting Real Heroes

Below please find a special message from one of our advertisers, Newsmax.com. From time to time, we receive opportunities we believe you as a valued customer may want to know about. Please note that the following message does not necessarily reflect the editorial positions of Human Events.


Dear Reader:

John McCain is declining in the polls, especially in key swing states. The National Republican Trust PAC, our sponsor today, has a strategy to help McCain win. Please take a moment to read their message below.

.

Thank you.

Obama’s Radical Agenda Exposed



An Urgent Message from The National Republican Trust PAC

Dear Fellow American:

Never before in the history of our nation have we faced such a grave crisis: one of the most radical political figures ever to be nominated by a major party is just minutes away from becoming President of the United States.

That man is Barack Obama.

He promises to change America forever. If elected, he will do just that – but in ways you make not like.

Remember Obama is the most liberal member of the United States Senate.

He received a 100 percent Liberal Rating from the National Journal, making him the most left-wing Senator in Washington – more liberal than even Democratic senators like Ted Kennedy.

If you look at Obama’s record, you will understand just how dangerous this man is.

He even has terrorist friends he won’t denounce. One such man is William Ayers,  a leader in the radical terrorist group the Weatherman Underground. The group bombed several government buildings, including the Pentagon, killing civilians and police officers.

In 2001, Ayers said he had no regrets for his actions and wished he could have done more.

The ties between Obama and Ayers are tight. Both served on two non profit boards and they worked closely together. Ayers even hosted a political event at his home for Obama.

Obama has acknowledged he is a friend of Ayers and defends his association by saying he, Obama, was only 8 years old at the time of the Pentagon bombing.

However, Obama has no explanation as to why he is still a friend of Ayers.

Obama has even been endorsed by radicals such as Nation of Islam Leader Louis Farrakhan.

No one can deny hearing about Obama’s relationship with the America-hating Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

There should be little doubt that William Ayers and Louis Farrakhan and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright are rooting for Obama – because he is one of them.

In keeping with such friends, Obama has promised to meet with radical leaders like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without “preconditions” even though Ahmadinejad has promised to “wipe Israel off the map” and  “destroy” America.

Even radical Hamas terrorists have praised him.

“We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election,” Ahmed Yousef, senior Hamas leader was quoted by ABC radio as saying.

Help the National Republican Trust PAC tell the truth about ObamaClick Here Now

Dangerous Economic Plan

And then there are Obama’s dangerous economic plans for America.

He wants to almost double the capital gains tax. He wants to strip the FICA tax cap off every worker making more than $97,500. He wants to increase the dividend tax. He wants to let the Bush tax cuts expire – giving almost every American family an automatic tax increase.

He has called for more than $800 billion in new spending programs.

He is so radical he even backed driver’s licenses for illegal aliens – even though such a move would help future terrorists move freely in the United States.

He is the most pro-abortion candidate in the history of the country. In 2001, as a state legislator in Illinois, he opposed a bill to protect live born children – children actually born alive!  He was the only Illinois senator to speak out against the bill.

He opposes gun rights. He has long history of trying to deny ordinary citizens access to guns.

He originally backed Washington D.C.’s total ban on private handguns – a ban that was overturned. The NRA rated him an “F” on gun positions and says he is one of the most dangerous anti-gun politicians in the nation.

Never forget that Obama is a Harvard educated elitist. To him we Americans are simply “bitter” and he has mocked us saying “[they] cling to their guns and their religion.”

Support the National Republican Trust PAC’s Campaign to Expose Obama - Click Here Now

Exposing the Truth

Hillary Clinton was late in recognizing the threat Obama posed to her campaign, but once she did, her strategy worked.

When Hillary exposed Obama publicly, her campaign saw a major turnaround.

Hillary won every major state primary in the nation with the sole exception of Obama’s home state of Illinois.

And even though Obama was “anointed” by the media and Democratic elites, Hillary went on to win eight of the last 10 Democratic primaries.

How did Obama beat Hillary for the nomination?

Well, using a loophole in Democratic rules, he was able to rack up large majorities in caucus states where he outspent and out organized her.

But in large, contested states she won almost every time. Why? Because when Democrats heard what Obama really stood for, they turned on him.

Make no mistake about it: If we let Americans know the truth about Obama, John McCain can win this election!

But we must employ Hillary Clinton’s strategy.

We must expose Obama for the dangerous radical he is.

Send a donation today to help our cause - Click Here Now

You Can Make a Difference

This is why the National Republican Trust Political Action Committee is moving to implement a “shock and awe” strategy against Obama in key states.

We plan to take out powerful television ads, Internet ads and other communications to inform Americans about the dangers posed by Barack Obama.

We plan to target key states that can make a difference - But we need your help to do it.

As a political action committee, we can accept up to $5,000 in donations per contributor.

A $5,000 donation can help us saturate a key market for a full day with television ads.

But if you can’t do the full amount, even $2,500 or $1,000 or $500 - Any amount you can afford will help.

Stop and think how much Obama may cost you and your family in new taxes over the next four years alone: $50,000, $75,000, $100,000 or even more.

Your donation today may actually save you much more in the years to come.

Please help today - Donate by Going Here Now

It will most certainly help our great nation.

Thank you.

Yours for America,

Scott Wheeler
Executive Director

P.S. Election Day is just weeks away. Your support today can make a huge difference – donate today  – Click Here Now

Paid for by The National Republican Trust PAC. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. 2100 M St. NW Suite 170-340 Washington, DC 20037-1233

Contributions to The National Republican Trust PAC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. No corporate funds are accepted.
The National Republican Trust PAC is not affiliated with the Republican National Committee


It’s Frontier Woman vs. Metrosexual Chic! Hold your breath — who is going to win this clash of the archetypes? This is not just a matter of style — Frontier Woman triggers a host of very real American associations — self-reliance, strong family bonds, courage in the face of danger, moral strength, independent thinking.

On the other side, Metro Chic has its own hold on our Effete Elites. It all comes down to the Western Enlightenment versus Metro Socialism.
Sarah Palin is a mythic figure out of the American imagination. That why she scares the Effetes and Corruptocrats. She’s John Wayne and Annie Oakley all rolled into one. Governor Palin is  America’s Everywoman, who faced and defeated the Corruptocrats in Alaska. Now she is heading up Main Street along with maverick John McCain, the Arizona sheriff, as the comfortable  townsfolk are hiding scared under their beds.
And that big cattle baron on the hill? He’s sneakily trying to undermine and destroy the Girl Deputy. He controls the newspapers and spreads vicious rumors, just his usual way of doing business. That’s the meaning of the Credit “Crisis” and the packed hog sausage Congress just made, supposedly to save us from the Fraud Crisis. We have just seen the cover ripped off an open Washington DC secret — the blatant ongoing exploitation by Democrats of Freddie and Fannie Home Fraud, which you and I will be paying for, for years to come.
Nothing could better symbolize the clash between our values and theirs. There’s Franklin Raines, the 90 million dollar slickster, who told Congress a few years ago that Fannie and Freddie just made free money. Home loans carried no risk! Just open the spigot and it’s beer and hog bellies for everybody.
Would you buy a used buggy whip from these guys? From Barack Obama’s “home mortgage advisor” Jim Johnson? From Barney Frank’s boyfriend at Fannie?
But it’s not just the F & F Fraud; it’s the phony oil crisis, the global warming hyper-scam, the constant purchase of cheap Leftie votes from the poor, unfortunate and easily suckered, the vicious Eternal Establishment at CIA and Treasury, plus the foreign Rogues Gallery in North Korea, Iran and Russia, and lastly our cowardly “allies” in Europe, all topped off with an endless flow of media lies…
You name it, it all comes down to another mythic metaphor —  the stinking Augean Stables of Washington, DC. In Greek myth it took Hercules to divert a river to wash out the Stables. We could use a few fresh Alaska snowstorms to help out here. The Potomac River is way too polluted.
But the Corruptocrats can see Mac the Sheriff and Sarah the Deputy walking up Main Street, and they’ve been taking potshots over and over again. They’ve been at it for a long time, enough to make old Sheriff Bush nearly helpless after eight years of daily abuse.
Is help finally on the way?
You’ll see the bullets flying hot and heavy in the last four weeks before November 4. Get ready to duck and weave, and answer them back if you can get a clear shot.