Saturday, November 30, 2002

WHY TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT IS A TERRIBLE THING: I don't think I need to explain this. Just read.
INCREASED INTEGRATION: Cities are apparently becoming more integrated throughout the nation.

Projects such as Jacobs Field and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Baltimore's Inner Harbor and the arts district in Denver have encouraged downtown redevelopment. The projects are attracting higher-income whites from the suburbs, single young professionals and married couples with no children or whose children have grown up and moved out, experts said.

So contrary to what Michael Moore will tell you, white people haven't moved to "suburbia" to hide from black people. They moved there because they were nice areas. And now that cities are becoming nicer to live in, white people are moving back in with those "scary black people".

Speaking of Michael, there's another vast Right-Wing Conspiracy going on.

Only about 20% of the American people showed up three weeks ago to vote for a Republican. That's it. Just 20%. And about 19% voted for a Democrat (an amazing number considering how few fights the Democrats put up around the country).

And 61% said, "To hell with all of them!" and refused to show up and vote.

I am not surprised this happened. My greatest fear after the 2000 election was that the majority of Americans would just give up and say, "Why bother?" If there was one message to the average American from Bush's theft of the White House, it was this: "Not only doesn't your vote count, but even if you do vote, we're not going to count it!" I fear millions earlier this month saw the futility of exercising their right to govern when those who did the governing decided that the will of the people could be disposed of as easily as a drunk driving citation on a Kennebunkport back road.


So apparently Democrats are not allowed to win anymore. If they did, the Right-Wing Conspiracy would take those votes away. Does Michael really believe the s**t that he posts? I mean seriously, is he for real?

I'd also like to note that Michael's last article about how the Democrats were going to win the election has mysteriously been removed from his site and not been mentioned since. Hmm, must be a conspiracy.
GOOD NEWS ON THE BUSINESS FRONT: Here's some interesting news claiming that African Americans are much more likely to start a business than white Americans.

Carter and Iric Nathenson, a veteran small-business finance specialist with the Minneapolis Community Development Agency, say that minorities and immigrants often don't have access to much capital. They start small street-front businesses doing what they did in the old country or here for somebody else - from shoe repair to body shops and barber shops to small eateries. Some are opening law, investment and accounting offices.

"Entrepreneurs do not look like the Marlboro Man," Carter said. "They look like the person next door. The percentage of blacks starting businesses is higher than whites. It doesn't matter what race or ethnicity, they want the same things: independence, self-realization, that feeling of being in control, and financial success.


And these new businesses are helped by conservative economics which give tax incentives to new business owners. Hmm, maybe conservatives don't hate black people after all.

Friday, November 29, 2002

'CAUSE HE'S SUCH A NICE GUY: Apparently, Presidents win elections because they're "nice guys". Nevermind the issues. It's all about how nice a guy you are. At least according to Joe Conason.

A reader explained this recurring, baffling phenomenon: "Americans usually vote for the friendly guy -- Ike vs. the intellectual Stevenson, Truman over Dewey, gush Bush not bore Gore, Reagan over naggin', JFK over Nixon, Carter over Ford.... It is a bit like those high school class [presidential] elections -- the vote goes to the nice, social type, not the socialist ..."

It's hard to argue with that cracker-barrel wisdom -- even if you feel, as I do, that Al Gore took an unprecedented, unfair and outrageous beating from the press and still won the election. According to the Times, Gore "is viewed unfavorably today by a ratio of almost two to one, despite a weeklong bath of favorable publicity that accompanied his national tour promoting two new books about the American family." Like most in the national press corps, Nagourney and Elder easily ignore the incessant bashing administered to Gore last week on Fox News, talk radio and in the right-wing press that certainly tempered favorable coverage he and Tipper received elsewhere. But those results have to be sobering to him as he contemplates his choices over the holidays. He deserved better last time, but that's no reason to think he'll get it next time.


Actually, Gore's books were barely in the top 500 of the New York Times bestseller list last I checked. And according to most polls, even most Democrats hope Gore won't run for President in 2004. I guess he isn't a nice guy.

Thursday, November 28, 2002

TURKEY DAY: Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!
WHY REGULATION INCREASES POLLUTION: I'm an environmentalist. Perhaps not to the extent of the environmentalists in the Green Party, but an environmentalist nonetheless. Which is why I'm against government regulation of pollutants. Yes, you heard right. While I believe government can play a small role in reducing pollutant emmissions, in the long run, these regulations tend to exacerbate the problem in the long run. Here's an article detailing this point.

Consider the case of hydrogen fueled cars, which have recently been revealed as a possible alternative to gasoline. With greater regulations on pollutants, automobile firms might not be able to make the hydrogen fueled car affordable for several decades. If regulations were instead removed, these car manufacturers would now have the capital to produce the much more environment friendly hydrogen cars at affordable prices in perhaps ten to twenty years. Also when you consider that the government itself is the biggest polluter in the United States, well therein lies a paradox of government telling firms not to pollute.

Tuesday, November 26, 2002

WHAT PASSES FOR INTELLIGENCE AT COLLEGE THESE DAYS: Jordan Berg, a student here at American University, who has proven to be incredibly mistaken in past article, shows that he still hasn't learned his lesson. Here is his latest whiny rant to The Eagle, our student newspaper. Anyway, I'm ready to do my own fisking starting...right...now:

I love when the political Right tries to lay claim to advancing the interests of the black community.

But we're not for advancing the interests of the black community. In fact, we hate all minorities. At least, according to Mr. Berg.

Every couple of years the Republican Party finds one self-loathing African-American who thinks that all black people can overcome the institutionalized barriers to prosperity and that it is African-Americans fault they are still stuck in slums and unending poverty.

I don't think all African Americans can overcome poverty. I think the ones that want to can. But not if liberals keep throwing money at the problem of public schools, while the quality of education continues to get worse. If a fire breaks out, do you throw money at the problem? No, you use water. Problems need to be addressed, not have money thrown at them.

The Right likes to hold these people up as the American ideal and tell the black community, “this is how you should be.”

I don't think the black community "should be" anything. But since it appears that Mr. Berg believes that they "should be" successful, then maybe he and fellow liberals should stop infringing on their ability to be successful. You see kids, liberals are against vouchers, which have proven to help poor black communities in the counties that have been given free reign to use the program. Here is the program that was established in Milwaukee. And it worked. But liberals don't like the program. Never could figure out why.

Well, thank you, Evan Wagner (Nov. 18, “Rice ignored by media”), but as a black American you can take how I “should” be and shove it.

Now we're talking!

It is not that the Left does not admire those who pick themselves up, it is that it cannot stand as the Right continues to preserve those boundaries to development.

And how exactly does the Right do that?...Jordan?...Jordan???

Conservatives like to tell African-Americans how it is only fair that they overcome these barriers because others have done it. Well, what are they doing to break down those barriers?

The voucher program for one. It also relieves them of taxes for social programs that flat out don't work. It wants to rescue them from a Social Security system that is going bankrupt. Would you like me to go on?

If it were not for the conservative Right, Condoleezza Rice’s story would not be this amazing story of overcoming odds.

And why is that?

Though the Bush Administration hired the somewhat-qualified Rice, their rhetoric is belied by Vice President Cheney, a man who voted against Nelson Mandela and in support of South African apartheid. They are not truly interested in helping the black community.

Rice was a graduate of Stanford, one of the top universities in the nation. She is fluent in many languages. She was one of the top students at her University. She is an expert in foreign policy. I think she was a wee-bit more than "semi-qualified". As for Cheney, I don't know if that story is true. If it is, then Dick Cheney is an idiot. But to paint all conservatives as racist based on the actions of one man in a vote conducted many years ago is to paint with a very broad brush.

While 95 percent of black Americans continue to support one party, I love that people like Wagner want us to believe that they are all idiots and voting for the wrong party. They are not “boobs;” they know who is there to help them and who is interested in continuing the system of assuring their poverty.

I think it's clear who is really on their side. I don't think I need to elaborate again.

Its offensive to believe that the right or Rice even takes the time to condescend to a people they continue to marginalize as American citizens. Black Americans are Democratic not because Democrats are so faithful to African-Americans, but because the alternative, Republicans are so much worse. At least the Democratic party attempts to correct the 500 years plus of oppression; Republicans are just interested in blaming black people for not overcoming the continuing oppression.

Yes that's right Jordan. Conservatives would like nothing better than to oppress African Americans for another 500 years, because conservatives don't like strengthening the economy, creating new jobs, or feel-good success stories. You see, as long as black people are oppressed, we're happy.

I would like to thank Wagner for identifying all five black Republicans. But to say something as ridiculous as most intellectual African-Americans are conservative is to prove a total lack of basic knowledge of the black Community.

Mr. Berg goes on to bash a conservative, accusing him of making "ridiculous" claims after stating there are only five black Republicans. The irony is beyond mention.

While Wagner can name some eccentric columnists, there are true great black thinkers such as Randall Robinson, a Harvard Law School graduate who founded the TransAfrica Forum, which spearheaded the shift in U.S. foreign policy towards South African apartheid. Sheila Jackson Lee and Maxine Waters are strong black women who have not only exceeded expectations and become two of the most successful women in the House of Representatives, and they did not have to turn their backs on their community to do it.

Wait a sec. "They did not have to turn their backs on their community to do it." This is a very dangerous statement, and typical of the resentment liberal minority members feel toward fellow conservative minority members. To imply that black conservatives have "turned their back" on fellow African Americans after they made the conscious decision to be conservatives is outright racist and dehumanizing. Mr. Berg cannot possibly fathom that black Americans might actually become conservative because they believe it is in the interest of society, including fellow African Americans. Instead, they have essentially become white to him and are now evil.

AU adjunct Julian Bond is not just a great teacher or a great spiritual leader of the black community, he is a great man. Professor Bond was the first black State Assembly representative in the Deep South. He is currently the chairman of the NAACP. Cornel West is not one of the greatest black minds, but rather one of the great minds of our time period. He was at Harvard University leading the African-American studies department, but left over some irreconcilable differences and is now teaching religion at Princeton University.

And conservatives respect their right to be in the Democratic party. Why can't it be a two-way street?

Perhaps the next time Wagner wants to talk about some of great minds of our time, he should do some research. While the Bush Administration wants to put on a show of acceptance, black Americans are not fooled.

Who is Mr. Bush trying to fool exactly? And how is he trying to fool them? Oh wait, it's another one of those liberal conspiracies. My bad.

While Wagner might want to tell me as a black American who my role models should be and how I should make it in this world, I think I can find my own role models, and preferably not one that hates the color of my skin.

More of the same old "conservatives hate me because I'm black" bulls**t. Nevermind the fact that this article was written in response to a conservative writer who praised Condoleeza Rice, an African American, throughout the entire article. Mr. Berg is still convinced that you can't possibly be a conservative without hating all minorities.

Jordan Berg is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences and the School of International Service.

And a massive tool.
"SOLDIERS OF THE HEGEMON": John Stryker fisks this poor college student within an inch of his life.
WOMEN NOT TO BE SEEN, CAMELS OK: Charles Johnson explains this interesting phenomenon.

Monday, November 25, 2002

MORE MOORE FACT-CHECKING: Maybe I should change the name of this web page. I just love bashing Michael Moore. Anyway, here's the latest.

How is anyone supposed to trust a man who lies even about the title of his movie?

TITLE: Moore titled the movie Bowling for Columbine because, he suggests, the two kids who shot up Columbine High in Littleton, Colo., went to a 6 a.m. bowling class on the day of the attack.
ACTUALLY: Cool story, but police say it's not true. They say the shooters skipped their bowling class that day.
MICHAEL MOORE HATES AMERICA: It's hard to believe how low Michael Moore has become. Once considered a great satirist, he has really fallen from grace. Consider what he really positied about September 11th.

The most breathtakingly idiotic segment of his show came toward the end, when he turned to the subject of the September 11 hijackings. Mr. Moore had already let us know that he had doubts as to whether Osama Bin Laden actually organized the attacks. If that were not bizarre enough, he went a step further. Brandishing a box-cutter, he wondered how the terrorists managed to subdue the passengers on the airliners using such modest weapons.
I would have thought the answer was obvious. Yet you can rely on Mr. Moore's fertile imagination to come up with a different response: The people on the airplanes allowed themselves to be intimidated because they belonged to a pampered, privileged class which had grown used to allowing other people to do the dirty work for them. What is more, Mr. Moore would have us believe that if the planes had been carrying 90 poor people or 90 black people or 90 skinheads, the outcome would have been very different. I am glad to report that even Mr. Moore's loyal audience fell silent at that point. There are, it seems, limits even to their gullibility.


In other words, September 11th would have never happened in Michael Moore's socialist paradise of a world, because the passengers on the planes always relied on others to do their dirty work. Let us ignore that many of these passengers were probably some of the hardest working people in America. Let us also ignore that I would take Dr. Ruth over Michael Moore in a fight any day. All fat jokes aside, I can hardly believe Mr. Moore actually honestly believes he and others like him could have stopped the hijackers. Especially considering Americans were often trained to comply with plane hijackers in order to ensure that the passengers remained safe.

One has to wonder if even Moore believes the junk that is coming out of his mouth these days.

Sunday, November 24, 2002

A CONSERVATIVE-LIBERTARIAN COALITION?: Here's what Randy Barnett had to say. I'll believe it when I see it. While libertarians are probably closer to conservatives than they are are to liberals, there are still some very dramatic differences.

(courtesy: Pejman)
ARE WE FREE: Jonah Goldberg thinks so, at least more so than at any other point in history, and he makes a good case here.