Can I just say how much I hate lists like these?
This time, CNNMoney.com took a study that only the most bizarre reader of the World Almanac could appreciate. In this study, it found the "Brainiest Cities."
"Brainiest," of course, means that many citizens have a bachelor's degree.
Not to say that having a bachelor's degree is a worthless thing because I do not think that is true in the least. However, that person with a "General Studies" degree, who took classes on a part-time schedule over the course of 7 years and likely barely passed can shove his "braininess" up his ass.
(Want to be depressed? The above statement might apply to Shaquille O'Neal, who makes more money than probably 95% of you)
Regardless, this particular list, like many that CNNMoney puts out, is pointless. Every city on it is basically either a population center or a college town or some combination of the two (Austin, Columbus, Omaha). The key stats that CNNMoney doesn't point out? Population centers tend to have major businesses in them and major businesses tend to want to hire people with college degrees.
So, the results of this list are just, um, shocking. Really, I'm surprised. Population centers and college towns tend to house smart people. No kidding. I bet you're next going to tell me that the sky is blue, infants are usually shorter than adults, and alcoholics tend to have liver problems.
And this article was the top story today.
Was money actually spent on this study? If it was, I'd bet that the people conducting it weren't from one of these towns.
I'm also sure they missed a town or two, or maybe there's a statistic or two that was off in the study. I'm also sure that there are plenty of other towns out there who house good, honest, hardworking people. Where's the list for friendliest people then?
What are readers supposed to get out of these lists anyway? Are they supposed to automatically move to these cities to affirm their intelligence, or take jobs that they may eventually hate? Are they supposed to move to these cities for their short commutes, which will inevitably cause long commutes when everyone moves there? Not that you would move to these cities. I mean, Bismarck, North Dakota is on this list...
Enough already! Home is where you feel at home. The best city in the world is your hometown, if you put a little pride and work into it. If you're so smart, live where you feel most comfortable. Find a job that fits your needs. Stop buying into these ridiculous lists, and better yet, email CNN or Money and tell them to give it a rest already!
I already did. I told them that the list was pointless and flawed. I reasoned that any list that would put Naperville, IL among the Top 5 Best Places to Live had to be illegitimate. Come on, have you been to Naperville? Have you put up with their crazy driving? Have you seen these shiny, plastic people?
...I've received no response yet.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Monday, August 28, 2006
It pays to be skeptical
And...I can't say it's particularly good to be right about this.
But it pays to be a skeptic, that's all I'll say.
But it pays to be a skeptic, that's all I'll say.
Saturday, August 26, 2006
Of the '60s and bus driver nightmares...
I'm a goddamn hippie.
This war in Vietnam is bullshit.
Impeach President Johnson...
...and Hendrix is awesome.
Sorry, I'm just in a 1960s sort of mood today. Mainly because I read this article.
Yeah, I'll approach the issue with caution because I am skeptical of the media, I don't know the entire story, and I do know how bad kids on the bus could be.
But man, you gotta know that this doesn't look good on its face.
Bus driver, in the south, in Louisiana, where racial tensions haven't exactly been LOW lately, makes black kids, but not the white kids, go to sit in the back of the bus.
I'm sorry, but I'd really like to ask the bus driver, "Why would you even chance it?"
Then again, who knows? This is the South, and though I love certain aspects of the South (namely the hospitality and the beaches of South Carolina), many people still consider their citizens backwards, and it might be because stories like this keep popping up.
Well, that, and the fact that they tried the most inane and nonsensical excuses to try and uphold segregation and other forms of racism in the 1960s. If you can find them, see the Supreme Court cases of Loving v. Virginia (holding that interracial marriage cannot be outlawed by state statute) and Cooper v. Aaron (where Arkansas pretty much asked if they could disregard an order of the Supreme Court to prevent integration of their schools. The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, said, um, No). The justifications that the segregationists put up were pretty silly, to say the least. You'll have trouble believing that people once thought this way.
Or maybe you won't.
So... here we are, nearly 40 years after the last Civil Rights Act was passed, still talking about this stuff, still remembering it as if Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus just yesterday. I'm not saying that we should ever forget the lessons of history (and certainly we should not, as our President has shown), but I am saying that it's sad that we must still so vividly remember it, with stories like the one above, one with so much similarity to those days that it makes me feel like I might just be growing up in the 1960s (you know, that coupled with a war-hungry Texan in the White House, a pointless war with high casualties, Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young on tour, and political dissension everywhere...gosh, it's more like the '60s than I thought).
So... Southerners... you're still drawing national attention for issues such as these. Please start asking yourselves if there is anything you can do to fix these situations. If there is, start doing it. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Southerners, I really do, but I hate hearing stories like these. These stories keep people in the North saying, "Southerners are backward, NASCAR-watching, beer guzzling hicks." I should note that I am a NASCAR fan myself, and I hate that sort of image as much as some proud Southerners do. Hell, why is there still this "political" distinction between "North" and "South?"
And please, Southerners, don't say, "To hell with you, I am what I am." What you are (indeed, what we all are) is a part of the United States, a nation whose government has went out of its way to solve these problems as best they can. Yes, they've been doing a pretty poor job of it lately, but strides have been made.
I admit, I'm not a Southerner, and I don't understand everything about being a Southerner. It's just that something's got to give with these things, you know? Something's just got to be done.
And soon.
This war in Vietnam is bullshit.
Impeach President Johnson...
...and Hendrix is awesome.
Sorry, I'm just in a 1960s sort of mood today. Mainly because I read this article.
Yeah, I'll approach the issue with caution because I am skeptical of the media, I don't know the entire story, and I do know how bad kids on the bus could be.
But man, you gotta know that this doesn't look good on its face.
Bus driver, in the south, in Louisiana, where racial tensions haven't exactly been LOW lately, makes black kids, but not the white kids, go to sit in the back of the bus.
I'm sorry, but I'd really like to ask the bus driver, "Why would you even chance it?"
Then again, who knows? This is the South, and though I love certain aspects of the South (namely the hospitality and the beaches of South Carolina), many people still consider their citizens backwards, and it might be because stories like this keep popping up.
Well, that, and the fact that they tried the most inane and nonsensical excuses to try and uphold segregation and other forms of racism in the 1960s. If you can find them, see the Supreme Court cases of Loving v. Virginia (holding that interracial marriage cannot be outlawed by state statute) and Cooper v. Aaron (where Arkansas pretty much asked if they could disregard an order of the Supreme Court to prevent integration of their schools. The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, said, um, No). The justifications that the segregationists put up were pretty silly, to say the least. You'll have trouble believing that people once thought this way.
Or maybe you won't.
So... here we are, nearly 40 years after the last Civil Rights Act was passed, still talking about this stuff, still remembering it as if Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus just yesterday. I'm not saying that we should ever forget the lessons of history (and certainly we should not, as our President has shown), but I am saying that it's sad that we must still so vividly remember it, with stories like the one above, one with so much similarity to those days that it makes me feel like I might just be growing up in the 1960s (you know, that coupled with a war-hungry Texan in the White House, a pointless war with high casualties, Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young on tour, and political dissension everywhere...gosh, it's more like the '60s than I thought).
So... Southerners... you're still drawing national attention for issues such as these. Please start asking yourselves if there is anything you can do to fix these situations. If there is, start doing it. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Southerners, I really do, but I hate hearing stories like these. These stories keep people in the North saying, "Southerners are backward, NASCAR-watching, beer guzzling hicks." I should note that I am a NASCAR fan myself, and I hate that sort of image as much as some proud Southerners do. Hell, why is there still this "political" distinction between "North" and "South?"
And please, Southerners, don't say, "To hell with you, I am what I am." What you are (indeed, what we all are) is a part of the United States, a nation whose government has went out of its way to solve these problems as best they can. Yes, they've been doing a pretty poor job of it lately, but strides have been made.
I admit, I'm not a Southerner, and I don't understand everything about being a Southerner. It's just that something's got to give with these things, you know? Something's just got to be done.
And soon.
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Especially look at the entry on the Chicago Cubs!
From a history compatriot at the University of Toledo:
You've heard of Wikipedia? Meet Uncyclopedia!
Unlike Wikipedia, Uncyclopedia gets mad when you give it factual information.
Which is really, really funny.
The whole website, no matter what the article, is guaranteed to keep you laughing for hours, as it did me (well, not hours for me, per se, as I am usually working on law school stuff).
But this site was too good not to tell y'all about, so check it out.
First, check the extensive editing done on this Our Lady Peace article.
Especially this article on the Cubs...
And the one about Chicago itself...
You've heard of Wikipedia? Meet Uncyclopedia!
Unlike Wikipedia, Uncyclopedia gets mad when you give it factual information.
Which is really, really funny.
The whole website, no matter what the article, is guaranteed to keep you laughing for hours, as it did me (well, not hours for me, per se, as I am usually working on law school stuff).
But this site was too good not to tell y'all about, so check it out.
First, check the extensive editing done on this Our Lady Peace article.
Especially this article on the Cubs...
And the one about Chicago itself...
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Wait, really?
Wow, gotta say, this surprised me.
Seems like a serious stretch though, mainly because the majority of the details are not known. Maybe when more information becomes available, I'll form a different opinion.
I admit, I pegged the parents as being guilty as hell, but that's just me.
One thing that troubles me about this story:
"Wood would not say how the Ramseys knew Karr. But JonBenet was born in Atlanta in 1990, and the Ramseys lived in the Atlanta suburb of Dunwoody for several years before moving to Colorado in 1991. "
So what was the guy doing in Colorado then? I dunno, I live in Illinois now, and I have no family, no serious friends, no real reason to be in Colorado. Even if I were single (I'm happily engaged), I don't think I'd even make a serious effort to go to Colorado for sex. So what was this guy doing there, unless he was working? I also thought I heard something about there not being any sign of forced entry. SOMEONE had to let him in, and I don't trust that it was JonBenet.
Again, I don't have enough information, but it seems like the cops really wanted to close this case. The only thing that legitimizes it in my eyes is, after more than a decade, no one could possibly care that much about closing this case. Everyone pretty much was okay accepting that the parents probably did it, though no one would know the truth.
If the case is officially closed though, thank God. I'd like to believe the system works in some fashion.
Seems like a serious stretch though, mainly because the majority of the details are not known. Maybe when more information becomes available, I'll form a different opinion.
I admit, I pegged the parents as being guilty as hell, but that's just me.
One thing that troubles me about this story:
"Wood would not say how the Ramseys knew Karr. But JonBenet was born in Atlanta in 1990, and the Ramseys lived in the Atlanta suburb of Dunwoody for several years before moving to Colorado in 1991. "
So what was the guy doing in Colorado then? I dunno, I live in Illinois now, and I have no family, no serious friends, no real reason to be in Colorado. Even if I were single (I'm happily engaged), I don't think I'd even make a serious effort to go to Colorado for sex. So what was this guy doing there, unless he was working? I also thought I heard something about there not being any sign of forced entry. SOMEONE had to let him in, and I don't trust that it was JonBenet.
Again, I don't have enough information, but it seems like the cops really wanted to close this case. The only thing that legitimizes it in my eyes is, after more than a decade, no one could possibly care that much about closing this case. Everyone pretty much was okay accepting that the parents probably did it, though no one would know the truth.
If the case is officially closed though, thank God. I'd like to believe the system works in some fashion.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Outrage? Anyone?
"I am grateful … to be able to say unequivocally that the debate is over. The science is clear: secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance, but a serious health hazard that causes premature death and disease in children and nonsmoking adults."
These were the words of Surgeon General Richard Carmona, whose term "expired" over the weekend.
I'd like to believe that.
Carmona was the man who outright stated, bravely and in the face of Big Tobacco lobbyists, "Secondhand smoke kills, PERIOD."
And now he's suddenly gone.
Two things stand out to me from the CNN link above:
1. Carmona's resignation went by without a single mention of it by the Department of Health and Human Services.
2. Health and Human Services deferred to the White House, who "did not wish to comment on personnel matters."
What?
Okay, let's look at this. So...THE CHIEF GUY at Health and Human Services steps down, and there's not one word from the Department? Um, if your director, your head, your "big kahuna" resigns, don't you think you ought to at least let the American public KNOW outside of a quickly disappearing article from CNN.com, and a letter that's "floating around Washington?"
Another thing: the White House doesn't wish to comment on personnel matters? Earth to the White House, YOU'RE THE WHITE HOUSE! The entire NATION has the right to know about YOUR personnel matters!!!! You are not the CIA, the FBI, or even the KGB for that matter. You are headed by a publicly elected official, and unless it's an issue of national security (which Carmona's resignation certainly is not), you should be OBLIGED to comment on personnel matters, and if you're in the White House Press Corps, it's your...gasp!...JOB!
I just think that the whole thing smacks of hiding something, which means shady business as usual for the Bush Administration. One guy speaks out against a major Republican funding lobby, and suddenly, he disappears with almost no comment.
So far, I've only seen one newspaper comment on this, namely, the Toledo Blade. Isn't anyone else suspicious of this? Isn't anyone else the least bit outraged at the possibilities here?
Is anyone home in my country?
These were the words of Surgeon General Richard Carmona, whose term "expired" over the weekend.
I'd like to believe that.
Carmona was the man who outright stated, bravely and in the face of Big Tobacco lobbyists, "Secondhand smoke kills, PERIOD."
And now he's suddenly gone.
Two things stand out to me from the CNN link above:
1. Carmona's resignation went by without a single mention of it by the Department of Health and Human Services.
2. Health and Human Services deferred to the White House, who "did not wish to comment on personnel matters."
What?
Okay, let's look at this. So...THE CHIEF GUY at Health and Human Services steps down, and there's not one word from the Department? Um, if your director, your head, your "big kahuna" resigns, don't you think you ought to at least let the American public KNOW outside of a quickly disappearing article from CNN.com, and a letter that's "floating around Washington?"
Another thing: the White House doesn't wish to comment on personnel matters? Earth to the White House, YOU'RE THE WHITE HOUSE! The entire NATION has the right to know about YOUR personnel matters!!!! You are not the CIA, the FBI, or even the KGB for that matter. You are headed by a publicly elected official, and unless it's an issue of national security (which Carmona's resignation certainly is not), you should be OBLIGED to comment on personnel matters, and if you're in the White House Press Corps, it's your...gasp!...JOB!
I just think that the whole thing smacks of hiding something, which means shady business as usual for the Bush Administration. One guy speaks out against a major Republican funding lobby, and suddenly, he disappears with almost no comment.
So far, I've only seen one newspaper comment on this, namely, the Toledo Blade. Isn't anyone else suspicious of this? Isn't anyone else the least bit outraged at the possibilities here?
Is anyone home in my country?
Thursday, August 10, 2006
The Sad Story of Maurice Clarett
Maurice Clarett is in the news again, this time for being arrested after being found with ammunition more appropriate for a German soldier than a washed-up former NCAA running back.
In a poll on ESPN.com's Daily Quickie, the majority of people said that they didn't care about Clarett's story (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/quickie).
I wouldn't normally, especially since I grew up a Michigan fan and lost a bet after Miami lost to OSU in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl. Damn you, Clarett.
But I care about this.
Clarett is hardly the first athlete to fall from grace. Why, just in the past couple weeks, Floyd Landis fell out of the entire world's favor. Different reason than Clarett though, but a similar sad story.
What makes Clarett's story so sad (and if it weren't for his constant stupidity, he might even be sympathetic too) is that his upcoming long-term jail time might, MIGHT have been avoided if he had just...stayed...in...college.
If Clarett had just stopped, told himself, "Hey, I'm at the top of the world here in Columbus. I'm a god to these people. Why don't I just hang around for a couple years and let my legend grow, along with my Heismans," things would be different. We'd be talking about "Maurice Clarett: Upcoming NFL Running Back Superstar" instead of, "Maurice Clarett: Prisoner # 250391."
Instead, he chose to challenge the NFL's rules, his coach's opinion, and plain common sense. Clarett thought he knew better. He sat out a year, then fought a court battle that everyone thought, maybe knew, would be a loser, got drafted in what, the 3rd round by the Denver Broncos? Then he got cut.
Then he decided to rob a Columbus couple, threaten police officers, and pack himself with ammunition, "Out of fear for his daughter's life."
Congratulations, Maurice. You're now a bottom-feeder in society and a poll on a reputable sports website agrees. It took you just less than three years to fall from "king" to "miserable peasant."
And you could have avoided all of it had you just...stayed...in...college.
Why do people have no sympathy for Maurice Clarett? He had it all! He had fame, glory, a championship, and savior status. Some athletes play their entire lives and never get that. Clarett had it and could have had more. For some reason though, he didn't know how to get the "more." He thought it came through challenging the rules and being bombastic. Boy was he wrong. He threw it all away. No ordinary person should be expected to understand this.
And none of it would have been an issue if he had just...stayed...in...college.
Maybe Clarett had the wrong people whispering in his ear. No, there's no maybe in that. He obviously had the wrong people whispering in his ear. They probably told him exactly what he played out: "You have it all now, but I can get you more." So Maurice listened. Realistically, all of us in society probably would listen if someone came up to us and said "You think you have it all? You don't, but I can get it for you." Sure, we'd listen. Most of us would at least be skeptical though. Not Maurice. He listened and followed it through to its bitter, tragic end. Challenge the well-established NFL! Go to court and win! Get more money, more fame, more power!
But he could have had that if he had just...stayed...in...college.
And now his life is essentially over. Maybe he could get hooked up later with some OSU collectors who want to pay him for signing footballs and baseball caps. That would bring him some money to support his new baby daughter (the real loser in all of this). Maybe he could ask one of those boosters who was likely so kind to him in the past if he could have a job with one of them. Maybe one of them would be willing to put his reputation on the line by taking a chance on Maurice. Maybe, but not right now.
Now, he goes to jail. If Maurice Clarett's life isn't at rock bottom, it probably will be soon, if he continues down this path he's on, a path he probably wouldn't be on if he had just...stayed...in...college.
Clarett couldn't see the big picture. He couldn't see that he had everything he needed in Columbus and that that could be enough. Maybe no one told him that. It doesn't matter, as he couldn't even see that for himself after a couple years. In this regard, Maurice Clarett is a truly blind man. Hopefully jail will give him some much-needed perspective.
And while he's in there, he can ponder (if he hasn't already) how things might have been differently had he just...stayed...in...college.
Just for a couple more years.
Beats a couple years in jail, which is where Clarett might end up now.
In a poll on ESPN.com's Daily Quickie, the majority of people said that they didn't care about Clarett's story (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/quickie).
I wouldn't normally, especially since I grew up a Michigan fan and lost a bet after Miami lost to OSU in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl. Damn you, Clarett.
But I care about this.
Clarett is hardly the first athlete to fall from grace. Why, just in the past couple weeks, Floyd Landis fell out of the entire world's favor. Different reason than Clarett though, but a similar sad story.
What makes Clarett's story so sad (and if it weren't for his constant stupidity, he might even be sympathetic too) is that his upcoming long-term jail time might, MIGHT have been avoided if he had just...stayed...in...college.
If Clarett had just stopped, told himself, "Hey, I'm at the top of the world here in Columbus. I'm a god to these people. Why don't I just hang around for a couple years and let my legend grow, along with my Heismans," things would be different. We'd be talking about "Maurice Clarett: Upcoming NFL Running Back Superstar" instead of, "Maurice Clarett: Prisoner # 250391."
Instead, he chose to challenge the NFL's rules, his coach's opinion, and plain common sense. Clarett thought he knew better. He sat out a year, then fought a court battle that everyone thought, maybe knew, would be a loser, got drafted in what, the 3rd round by the Denver Broncos? Then he got cut.
Then he decided to rob a Columbus couple, threaten police officers, and pack himself with ammunition, "Out of fear for his daughter's life."
Congratulations, Maurice. You're now a bottom-feeder in society and a poll on a reputable sports website agrees. It took you just less than three years to fall from "king" to "miserable peasant."
And you could have avoided all of it had you just...stayed...in...college.
Why do people have no sympathy for Maurice Clarett? He had it all! He had fame, glory, a championship, and savior status. Some athletes play their entire lives and never get that. Clarett had it and could have had more. For some reason though, he didn't know how to get the "more." He thought it came through challenging the rules and being bombastic. Boy was he wrong. He threw it all away. No ordinary person should be expected to understand this.
And none of it would have been an issue if he had just...stayed...in...college.
Maybe Clarett had the wrong people whispering in his ear. No, there's no maybe in that. He obviously had the wrong people whispering in his ear. They probably told him exactly what he played out: "You have it all now, but I can get you more." So Maurice listened. Realistically, all of us in society probably would listen if someone came up to us and said "You think you have it all? You don't, but I can get it for you." Sure, we'd listen. Most of us would at least be skeptical though. Not Maurice. He listened and followed it through to its bitter, tragic end. Challenge the well-established NFL! Go to court and win! Get more money, more fame, more power!
But he could have had that if he had just...stayed...in...college.
And now his life is essentially over. Maybe he could get hooked up later with some OSU collectors who want to pay him for signing footballs and baseball caps. That would bring him some money to support his new baby daughter (the real loser in all of this). Maybe he could ask one of those boosters who was likely so kind to him in the past if he could have a job with one of them. Maybe one of them would be willing to put his reputation on the line by taking a chance on Maurice. Maybe, but not right now.
Now, he goes to jail. If Maurice Clarett's life isn't at rock bottom, it probably will be soon, if he continues down this path he's on, a path he probably wouldn't be on if he had just...stayed...in...college.
Clarett couldn't see the big picture. He couldn't see that he had everything he needed in Columbus and that that could be enough. Maybe no one told him that. It doesn't matter, as he couldn't even see that for himself after a couple years. In this regard, Maurice Clarett is a truly blind man. Hopefully jail will give him some much-needed perspective.
And while he's in there, he can ponder (if he hasn't already) how things might have been differently had he just...stayed...in...college.
Just for a couple more years.
Beats a couple years in jail, which is where Clarett might end up now.
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
When Lou Dobbs is right, he's right
Thank you, Lou Dobbs, for saying what many don't have the guts to say. Haven't heard "do-nothing Congress" since the days of Truman.
Dobbs: Five-weeks off for 'do-nothing Congress'
Dobbs: Five-weeks off for 'do-nothing Congress'
By Lou Dobbs
CNN
Wednesday, August 2, 2006; Posted: 12:34 p.m. EDT (16:34 GMT)
The Republicans in Congress have little to brag about when they return home. And the Democrats have a lot of explaining to do, as well. Once the party of the New Deal, Fair Deal and Great Society, the party of working men and women, the Democrats are now buried as deeply in the pockets of their corporate masters as are the Republicans.
The Democratic Party has played a major role in helping to pass legislation that is grossly injurious to middle-class Americans and their families. This Congress, Republican-led with complicit Democrats, has cut $13 billion in college-student aid, passed numerous free-trade agreements that threaten good-paying jobs and approved an unconscionable bankruptcy law written by credit-card companies that is nothing less than a federal government heel in the neck of American families bankrupted by catastrophic illness and crushing medical bills.
In fact, 18 of the 44 Democrats in the Senate and 73 of the 201 Democrats in the House voted in favor of the creditor-friendly bankruptcy bill. They apparently either didn't bother to learn or didn't care that half of all bankruptcies are caused by the soaring medical bills that stem from unforeseen illnesses and injuries.
The Democrats are also casting deciding votes on the so-called free-trade agreements that have allowed corporate supremacists to export American jobs to the cheapest sources of labor. Twenty-two House Democrats approved the recent Oman free-trade agreement, including 10 that had previously voted for the Central American Free Trade Agreement. CAFTA, which passed the House by only two votes at the midnight hour, opened up to American businesses a market about the size of New Haven, Connecticut.
And Democrats in the Senate have embraced the wrongheaded policies of the Bush administration on border security and illegal immigration. Thirty-eight Democrats joined with the Senate Republican leadership to crush the Republican majority and pass the illegal-alien amnesty bill.
Forty-two Democrats voted against legislation that would have built a border fence to stop the flow of illegal aliens and drugs across our borders. In fact, it was Democrat Christopher Dodd of Connecticut whose amendment was attached to the legislation that would require the U.S. government to consult with the Mexican government before building a fence along our southern border.
Congressional Democrats are even more dismissive of the need for border security than the Senate Republicans. House Republicans have taken to calling the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill the "Reid-Kennedy bill" because Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts shaped most of the legislation.
The Democrats incredibly talk about illegal aliens as victims as they press for amnesty, yet not one has raised concerns for the true victims of corporate America's lust for cheap labor: American working men and women, taxpayers all.
It was, after all, Sen. Reid who argued in 1993 that illegal aliens place "tremendous burdens" on this country's justice system, schools and social programs, stretching our federal wallet to the limit as a result of "illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits."
What could possibly explain Sen. Reid's complete conversion on the issue? He's said it was from talking to his wife and immigrants, but could his state's wholesale importation of illegal aliens and the importance of all that corporate lobbying and campaign contribution money be a factor? Surely not.
And how about that firebrand advocate for the Democratic Party's traditions and values, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean? Once considered a presidential candidate with a refreshing vision for America, Dean now spends no time pursuing ideas and proposals that would help working men and women. Instead, he's devoting his time and energy begging for money at the same contribution slop trough as his opponents while hurling insults at Republicans and indulging in petty name-calling.
Instead of articulating a vision and plan to help the United States win the war in Iraq, he said simply late last year, "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong." And when Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was to address a joint session of Congress, Dean called him an anti-Semite for criticizing Israel. The petulant DNC chairman outdid himself by comparing an inconsequential Republican congresswoman, Katherine Harris of Florida, to the rather consequential Joseph Stalin. The incomparable Howard Dean managed to do that while calling for an end to political divisiveness.
The Democrats want to wrest control of Congress from Republicans, and they have a better than average opportunity to accomplish the feat. The next five weeks just might be a good time for frustrated, disgusted constituents to ask what it will take to elect a Congress willing to represent working men and women and their families.
And let me know what you hear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)