New Ruskin College.com
Lecture Notes 2012
Home
Catalog of Courses
Intel Operations:
Psy Ops
Lecture Hall
Lecture Notes 2016
Lecture Notes 2015
Lecture Notes 2014
Lecture Notes 2013
Lecture Notes 2012
Lecture Notes: July 2008 - June 2010
Lecture Notes: May 07 - June 08
Lecture Notes: Oct. '05- April '07
Lecture Notes: September '05
Lecture Notes: August '05
Lecture Notes: July '05
Lecture Notes: June '05
Lecture Notes: May '05
Lecture Notes: April '05
Lecture Notes: March '05
Lecture Notes: January & February '05
Lecture Notes: December '04
Lecture Notes: November '04
Lecture Notes: October '04
Lecture Notes: September '04
Lecture Notes: August '04
Lecture Notes: July '04
Lecture Notes: June '04
Lecture Notes: May '04
Lecture Notes: April '04
Imus Protests April 2004
Last Will & Testament
Funeral Procession
Baghdad Claims Office: How I would settle Iraqi Prisoner Claims.
Top 40
Metaphysics 303
Who Killed Duane Garrett: Part II
This is what is Wrong with the Republican Party. Part I & Part II
A Public Letter to Rosie Allen
A Public Appeal to Governor Davis
How Don and Mike Removed the Evil One From MSNBC
Who Killed Duane Garrett? 3 Suspects: Motive Greed & Power
McGurk Tutorial
45 minutes and the Distortions of History
Don Imus Says Good Morning
Judgment Day


Sunday, October 21, 2012

et respondens rex dicet illis amen dico vobis quamdiu fecistis uni de his fratribus meis minimis mihi fecistis

And the king answering shall say to them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me

Lost a SAM at New Ruskin College.com

Where have all the Libyan surface to air missiles gone?

Gone to terrorists everyone, when will we ever learn?


Lecture Notes 10-21-12

To: Mr. Romney

Subject: Obama’s failure to secure surface to air missiles in the Libyan stockpiles.

Someone should ask the President why he did not take control of the Libyan surface to air missiles.

Was it because the former academic, community organizer, machine politician, was unable to direct the U. S. M. C. into harms way to secure these weapons? Too timid to take action? Note that it took months to give the order to attack OBL even though they knew the Al-Qaeda messengers were coming and going from the safe house. (The US learned the name of the messenger from water boarding the terrorists. (In WWII the US charged the Japanese for water boarding its personnel. The difference is that our troops were in uniform, in accordance with international law. When these troops moved they carried their national flag for all to see. Their actions were proclaimed in a declaration of war and their actions were set against the uniformed enemy. The US abided by the Geneva Conventions. The terrorists do not wear uniforms, they target civilians, they act in secret.))

With Mr. Obama in office we will find out where the surface to air missiles are when the air planes start falling from the sky.

PS And I think that Iran’s nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.

Thursday, October 18, 2012


Lecture Notes
9-17-12

To: Mr. Romney


Subject: The First Policy is the Economy, but it is not the only Policy.

I am a Republican because I recognize that the first policy of government must be to get the economy right. If you do not get the economy right none of the other policies matter. However the difference between the two political parties with respect to the economy has narrowed in recent years. And not just in America but in Britain as well. The so called New Labor Party represents an open acknowledgement that the Socialist Dreams have been replaced by economic realism.

Since Billy Clinton led the Democrats back to the center on the economy, the debate between the two Parties turns less on economics and more on the other issues which divide us. For example welfare had been for at least three generations thought by Democrats as an alternative or substitute to gainful participation in the economy. Welfare reform under Billy Clinton is another open acknowledgement that welfare was no substitute for work. Both Parties had come to see that the culture of welfare was ruinous to the human spirit.


(As I understand the position of Doctor Professor Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan on welfare reform, it came down to one issue: will we guarantee the children of welfare absolute protection? Dr. Gingrich is the only political leader to answer Dr. Moynihan’s position. Dr. Gingrich offered the idea of creating orphanages. (I had previously recommended we call orphanages “24 hour schools,” as a more up to date term.) But Billy Clinton turned a blind eye on the plight of the children of welfare. No guarantees for the children were forthcoming. They “rolled over Moynihan” as one administration staffer said.)

But the fact remains that before welfare reform the Republican Party held the leading position on that issue and the culture of dependency . The Democrats for over three generations aligned themselves with that poisonous culture of welfare. (The recent movie Precious showed the lives of welfare recipients.) However, the point I am making is strategic: as the Democrats move to the center the argument for Republicans grows weaker.


Had the Republicans followed Dr. Gingrich’s suggestion the Republicans could have once again taken the moral high ground by offering 24 hour schools for troubled youths. There are 19,000 children in New York Cities’ homeless shelters. You may feel that these are just part of the 47% who are dependent on the government and you “don’t care about them.”


However, the 5% to 10% you identify as being in the center and who may be amenable to our arguments are concerned about the homeless, and about the 50 million without insurance coverage, and about the 23 million unemployed or under employed or just to discouraged to look for work.

If you want to persuade the middle 10% you must concern yourself with the bottom 47% for the middle 10% of voters are looking at how you would treat “the least of them,” before giving you their vote.

PS And I think the Iranian nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.


Saturday, October 13, 2012

Americans disappointed by Humanity at New Ruskin College


Lecture Notes: 10-13-12

The Florida state Board of Education passed a controversial plan to set reading and math goals based upon race.

News Tampa CBS

October 12, 2012 11:32 AM

Florida State Board of Education, John F. Kennedy Middle School, Palm Beach County, Palm Beach Post

Palm Beach, Fla. (CBS TAMPA) – The Florida State Board of Education passed a plan that sets goals for students in math and reading based upon their race.

On Tuesday, the board passed a revised strategic plan that says that by 2018, it wants 90 percent of Asian students, 88 percent of white students, 81 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of black students to be reading at or above grade level. For math, the goals are 92 percent of Asian kids to be proficient, whites at 86 percent, Hispanics at 80 percent and blacks at 74 percent. It also measures by other groupings, such as poverty and disabilities, reported the Palm Beach Post.

The plan has infuriated many community activists in Palm Beach County and across the state.

“To expect less from one demographic and more from another is just a little off-base,” Juan Lopez, magnet coordinator at John F. Kennedy Middle School in Riviera Beach, told the Palm Beach Post.

JFK Middle has a black student population of about 88 percent.

“Our kids, although they come from different socioeconomic backgrounds, they still have the ability to learn,” Lopez said. “To dumb down the expectations for one group, that seems a little unfair.”

Others in the community agreed with Lopez’s assessment. But the Florida Department of Education said the goals recognize that not every group is starting from the same point and are meant to be ambitious but realistic.

As an example, the percentage of white students scoring at or above grade level (as measured by whether they scored a 3 or higher on the reading FCAT) was 69 percent in 2011-2012, according to the state. For black students, it was 38 percent, and for Hispanics, it was 53 percent.

In addition, State Board of Education Chairwoman Kathleen Shanahan said that setting goals for different subgroups was needed to comply with terms of a waiver that Florida and 32 other states have from some provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. These waivers were used to make the states independent from some federal regulations.

“We have set a very high goal for all students to reach in Florida,” Shanahan said.

But Palm Beach County School Board vice-chairwoman Debra Robinson isn’t buying the rationale.


“I’m somewhere between complete and utter disgust and anger and disappointment with humanity,” Robinson told the Post. She said she has been receiving complaints from upset black and Hispanic parents since the state board took its action this week.

Robinson called the state board’s actions essentially “proclaiming racism” and said she wants Palm Beach County to continue to educate every child with the same expectations, regardless of race

PS And I think Iran’s nuclear program must be destroyed and the regime should be over thrown.

Friday, October 12, 2012

No end to it at New Ruskin College


Lecture Notes: 10-12-12

To: Mr. Romney

Subject: Dr. Milton Freidman’s last words

I previously explained the reason for how a Conservative could support minimum wage laws.

I pointed out the things we have done to limit the freedom of action for the poor: push carts in the downtown are outlawed, even such occupations as florists, hair dressers, and manicurists all require testing for state and local government’s licensing. One could also include the closing of the Great Frontier; the heavily capitalized farming industry displacing small farmers; the loss of low value added industries as they moved to overseas; the loss of manual labor jobs from construction sites to the factory floor.

Perhaps nothing has been so damaging to the laboring classes as the huge bureaucratic project of exclusionary zoning and its single use doctrine. City planners have imposed anti-market controls based on an esthetic that they have learned at the elite schools. At these schools they learn to regard people as “congestion;” tall buildings as a kind of pollution and their residents as “aliens;” and mixed use zoning as old fashion.

What is most notable about exclusionary zoning and building codes is the across the board acceptance by both Right and Left. The Left can at least claim that they believe in government and its ability to direct the economy. But even conservatives see nothing wrong with denying private property owners the full use of their property. As Dr. Edward Glaeser has said in his important new book The Triumph of the City, Boston, New York City, and San Francisco all Left controlled for the last 60 years are leaders in zoning out the poor.

Cities have been so successful at zoning out the poor that they now have no place for those low income workers that are needed by the city. The City of Santa Barbara, for example,, has turned over church and city parking lots for people who are living in their cars. The homeless are nannies, housekeepers, gardeners, bus drivers etc.

Given all of this interference with the free market what is a minimum wage law? An unacceptable interference with free enterprise? Of course this attitude is foolish. But not so foolish that Rush Limbaugh can’t proclaim it. (I once posted a series of posts on modular construction which is outlawed by most cities with exclusionary building codes. Rush Limbaugh went on the air and said he would not want a mobile home next to his mansion. (Note there is a difference between planned communities where the deeds include such covenants that limit what can be built, and even what color it can be painted, and cities with no deed restrictions. ))

All these examples are just a few that could be used to show how we the people, acting through the state, have undermined the position of the laboring classes, i.e. the poor. The creation of a minimum wage law is just a pitifully small way we can counter balance all this and give aid to the poor.


Milton Friedman was asked what he thought of the logic of this argument. He replied in an exasperated way saying ‘There will be no end to it. The government is involved in so many ways in the market that there will be no limit to demands to counteract the interference in the market.’

I am reminded of a New Yorker cartoon showing a doctor and a nurse standing at the window of the nursery with the caption of the doctor saying “Where will it all end Nurse Smith. . . where will it all end.”




PS And I think Iran’s nuclear program must be destroyed and the regime should be over thrown.

Mary Joe you came close but "Doctor Professor" is not unusual enough to warrant a post here. Try for five words in a row next time. 

 Lecture Notes    10-01-12
 
But what are we to do Mr. President, the scorned and wretched of this world, who want to learn!

George H. W. Bush:   Well go back to school god damn it what do I care.

Presidential Adviser number one:  You can’t talk to him like that.

Presidential Adviser number two:  Yeah, because you are the President.  

New Ruskin College

Style Book:

Capitalized Titles:Capitalize titles only if they refer to a specific position.  For example, when discussing presidents of private companies use president (un-capitalized).  However if you are referring to a specific President, for example, of the Ford Motor Company, you capitalize President.  At the first use the full title should be used and capitalized, for  example President of the United States of America.  After the first use the full title, ‘United States of America,’ can be dropped and we can refer to the President only.  The reader  knows the capitalized President by itself refers back to President of the United States of America. 

Lecture Notes    09-29-12

 
To:  Mr. Romney
Subject:  Obama: If Romney Wants to Start Another War, "He Should Say So!”
                                                                 
------- Real Clear Politics 9-23-12
 

Another war!  How many wars have you started?  Doesn’t Mr. Obama see that when he says the United States “will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” he is at least implying that we will resort to war?  Or does his admonition not apply to himself?  Is it because he really is not thinking he will resort to war?  

 Mr. Obama does not have to tell the public he will go to war because he knows secretly that he is not even considering war to stop the Iranians.  He knows he is lying when he implies we will go to war. Community organizing requires a different set of skills than does an executive leadership position.  Mayors, governors, and presidents of countries or presidents of companies, know the real meaning of leadership.  Mr. Obama does not set a red line on the Iranian question, because he cannot commit himself to a path of action. 

He cannot apply his will to a complicated international problem;  or any problem.
 Recall that in 2008 he was promising us he would open negotiations with the Iranians.  Starting up the negotiations merely needed the community organizer to be willing to meet with the Iranians.  How did that work out? Community Organizers are good “facilitators” of discussions, they can use white boards to track the suggestions of the target group they are able to make everyone feel appreciated, but  putting all that into actions, . . . not so much. 

PS  And I think Iran’s nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.        

Lecture Notes   09-29-12
Kobar Towers List of the Dead
19 CAUSES FOR WAR:
Staff Sgt. Daniel B. CafourekWatertown, South DakotaEglin AFB, Florida
Sgt. Millard D. CampbellAngelton, TexasEglin AFB, Florida
Senior Airman Earl F. Carrette Jr.Sellersburg, IndianaEglin AFB, Florida
Tech Sgt. Patrick P. FennigGreendale, WisconsinEglin AFB, Florida
Master Sgt. Kendall K.J. KitsonYukon, OklahomaEglin AFB, Florida
Airmen 1st Class Brian W. McVeighDebary, FloridaEglin AFB, Florida
Airman 1st Class Brent E. MarthalerCambridge, MinnesotaEglin AFB, Florida
Airman 1st Class Peter J. MorgeraStratham, New HampshireEglin AFB, Florida
Tech. Sgt. Thanh V. NguyenPanama City, FloridaEglin AFB, Florida
Airmen 1st Class Joseph E. RimkusEdwardsville, IllinoisEglin AFB, Florida
Senior Airman Jeremy A. TaylorRosehill, KansasEglin AFB, Florida
Airmen 1st Class Joshua E. WoodyCorning, CaliforniaEglin AFB, Florida
Capt. Christopher J. AdamsMassapequa Park, New YorkPatrick AFB, Florida
Capt. Leland T. HaunClovis, CaliforniaPatrick AFB, Florida
Master Sgt. Michael G. HeiserPalm Coast, FloridaPatrick AFB, Florida
Staff Sgt. Kevin J. JohnsonShreveport, LouisianaPatrick AFB, Florida
Airman 1st Class Justin R. WoodModesto, CaliforniaPatrick AFB, Florida
Staff Sgt. Ronald L. KingBattlecreek, MichiganOffutt AFB, Nebraska
Airmen 1st Class Christopher LesterPineville, West VirginiaWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio
Source: The Pentagon

PS And I think Iran’s nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.

Lecture Notes 9-27-12

To:  Condoleezza Rice
Subject:  Strongmen
 

Condoleezza Rice:  We didn’t make the mistake of installing a strongman in Iraq.  We didn’t make that mistake.

Don Imus:  Who said that?  Who said we should install a strongman?  What is she talking about?

Note:  The Prince of Jordan recommended that the US install a strongman.

Note:  I also was thinking of General Douglas MacArthur the American Shogun of Japan when I recommended to President George W. Bush a “strongman.”  General Douglas MacArthur was an American strongman, who also wrote the Japanese Constitution, which is still in use.  If you are not going to do any preliminary steps before going into the country then you need someone to take charge, take command.  Instead we had a series of boards selected at random.  By my count we went through three separate “governing boards.”  This did not instill confidence into the ranks of the New Iraqi Army.  Next time Condoleezza contact me directly we don’t need Imus In The Morning. 
 

 PS  And I think Iran’s nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.       

  

"Savvy Strongmen" --- CNN.com    9-26-12

Lecture Notes  9-23-12

To:  Mr. Romney
Subject: In the Defense of the One Percent. 

A new class is forming world wide.  I call it the New Middle Class. 

The British first used the term, middle class, to describe the class which occupied the place below the Landed Aristocracy yet still above the working classes both white collar and blue collar.  In America when we discuss the middle class we mean the most numerous class.  There is not the same awareness of classes as the British identify. 


Americans include just about everyone who is working, from plumbers to lawyers, in the middle class.  It is virtually a mathematically determined category.   

It is this British concept of middle class that I am thinking of when I defend the One Percent.  This One Percent is above the upper class (and middle class) but below the so called New Class of government leaders, and the menagerie of toadies and hanger-ons, including the lobbyists, journalists, and power brokers. 

My defense of the One Percent can be stated in just one sentence.  Would you rather have Mr. Obama in charge of Bill Gates’ estate?  Do you want all the power to be located in the hands of the New Class who already control the vast apparatus of the modern state?   

By inserting into our society the One Percent we create a new power center to counter balance the power of the state.  These One Percenters, most of whom are very savvy  characters, can compete with the state in carrying out new programs and projects that are beneficial to our society. 

Take for example Bill Gates’ investments in research for a cure of Malaria. The state could have lead the way on Malaria but the New Class wasn’t interested.  These One Percenters as I have said are very savvy and form not only an alternative center for action in the world but an alternative perspective to see what is needed in both private and government affairs.

It has been argued that this New Middle Class uses its wealth to manipulate the state for their own and sole benefit.   It is true some have used the state to manipulate the market.  Mr. Slim in Mexico for example.  This would argue for the Republican Party’s stance that the state should stand at arms length and let the market determine winners and losers not for the Democrats stance that the New Middle Class should be taxed out of existence.

For reasons explained elsewhere, without wage and price controls, the New Middle Class will respond to higher taxes by transferring the higher taxes via the price mechanism on to their customers.  Remember the One Percenters  are rich because they offer goods or services that are in high demand.  This demand allows the One Percenters  to transfer their costs, including taxes, on to their consumers.  Unless wage and price controls are applied there is no limit to what the One Percenters can charge. 

When we say someone is rich what we mean is that their goods and services are in high demand.  Most of us have a more limited ability to pass on our costs including taxes,  because the goods and services we offer are in less demand, meaning that we must absorb some costs including taxes. 

The poor are poor because the goods and services they offer are in low demand.  The poor have a low ability to transfer their costs including taxes.
 
The  One Percenters’ goods and services are in high demand perhaps in part because they reduce the number of people in the middle or the poor classes that are needed by their customers.  Mr. Ellison for example may supply Oracle products and services that reduce the number of accountants (middle class) and file clerks (poor class) needed by his customers.

And this may cause you to think we should tax the One Percenters.  But without wage and price controls the high demand for their goods and services will allow the One Percenters to pass on their taxes to the other classes who have lower demand for their goods and services.  The One Percent pay 40% of the national income tax.  Where do you think the One Percent gets the money to pay these taxes?  From the other classes via the price mechanism.    

This is the real reason why taxes should be kept as low as possible, because taxes settle into society on those with the lowest ability to pass on costs to customers:  the poor. 

The New Middle Class may be involved in the process of creative destruction, which negatively affects the other classes but this is inevitable and certainly taxing them will not change a thing.  Or do you think technological progress should be outlawed?


Republicans have long argued that corporate taxes are passed on by the companies to their customers through the price mechanism.  This is certainly true for successful companies, those whose goods and services are in high demand.  But if this is true for companies why should we be surprised that the New Middle Class can also pass on its taxes and other costs?
 

PS  And I think Iran’s nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.       

Lecture Notes
9-17-12

To:  Mr. Romney
Subject: The First Policy is the Economy, but it is not the only Policy. 

I am a Republican because I recognize that the first policy of government  must be to get the economy right.  If you do not get the economy right none of the other policies matter.  However the difference between the two political parties with respect to the economy has narrowed in recent years.  And not just in America but in Britain as well.  The so called New Labor Party represents an open acknowledgement that the Socialist Dreams have been replaced by economic realism.

Since Billy Clinton lead the Democrats back  to the center on the economy, the debate between the two Parties turns less on economics and more on the other issues which divide us.  For example welfare had been for at least three generations thought by Democrats as an alternative or substitute  to gainful  participation in the economy.  Welfare reform under Billy Clinton is another open acknowledgement that welfare was no substitute for work.  Both Parties had come to see that the culture of welfare was ruinous to the human spirit. 

(As I understand the position of Doctor Professor Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan on welfare reform, it came down to one issue:  will we guarantee the children of welfare absolute protection?  Dr. Gingrich is the only political leader to answer Dr. Moynihan’s position.  Dr. Gingrich offered the idea of creating orphanages.  (I had previously recommended we call orphanages “24 hour schools,”  as a more up to date term.) But  Billy Clinton turned a blind eye on the plight of the children of welfare.  No guarantees for the children were forthcoming.  They “rolled over Moynihan” as one administration staffer said.)
 
But the fact remains that before welfare reform the Republican Party held the leading position on that issue  and the culture of dependency .  The Democrats for over  three generations aligned themselves with that poisonous culture of welfare.  (The recent movie Precious showed the lives of welfare recipients.)  However, the point I am making is strategic:  as the Democrats move to the center the argument for Republicans  grows weaker.

Had the Republicans followed Dr. Gingrich’s suggestion the Republicans could have once again taken the moral high ground by offering 24 hour schools for troubled youths.  There are 19,000 children in New York City's homeless shelters.  You may feel that these  are just part of the 47% who are dependent on the government and you don’t care about them. 

However, the 5% to 10% you identify as being in the center and who may be amenable to our arguments are concerned about the homeless, and  about the 50 million without health insurance coverage, and about the 23 million unemployed or under employed or just too discouraged to look for work, and 47 million on food stamps. 

If you want to persuade the middle 10%  you must concern yourself with the bottom 47% for the middle 10% of voters are looking at how you would treat “the least of them,”  before giving you their vote. 
 
 PS And I think the Iranian nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.
 

www.NewRuskinCollege.com

Lecture Notes  9-16-12 

To:  Mr. Romney


Subject:  Israel justified  in using nuclear weapons on Iranian targets.

Israel has always said it would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East.  There is no doubt that the Iranians are in the process of introducing nuclear  weapons.  Thus if Israel strikes  Iran with nuclear weapons it will be in retaliation of Iran decision to go ahead with its nuclear weapon program.  Israel  will not have been the first to introduce nuclear weapons.

It should be recalled that the Korean War was brought to an end because of General-President Eisenhower’s secret threat to resort to nuclear weapons if the Chinese did not agree to stop the war.  They did not agree to peace only to an end of hostilities. 
The threat of nuclear weapons has not deterred Iran’s rulers thus far.  This fact alone should inform our evaluation of the Iranian intentions. 

Even now, before they have acquired nuclear weapons, they are willing to expose their subjects to nuclear attack.  (Fortunately most Iranian  nuclear weapons targets are buried deep in the ground along way from populated areas.)  If the Iranians are willing to brave nuclear attack now, before they have nuclear weapons, why should we believe they will not expose their subjects to attack when they do have them?  Numerous Iranian officials have said that whereas the Muslims can survive   a nuclear attack the Jewish State can not.

Some have argued that an attack would only set back the Iranian nuclear program for a few years.  First it should be noted that a few years seems a blessing to the condemned.   Wouldn’t you take a few years reprieve?  Secondly, this contention argues for more action by Israel not less. 

In addition to taking out the Iranian nuclear weapons targets Israel should take out additional targets to assist the people of Iran to take back their country. 
For example, tactical nuclear weapons could be used to destroy Iran’s one and only oil refinery.  Iran’s import and export oil docks should also be destroyed.  Electro Magnetic Pulse weapons should be used on the main urban targets.  Water works and sewer systems  should also be destroyed.  And every attempt should be made to decapitate the regimes leaders. 

The city of Qom itself could lawfully be destroyed as it is the seat of the regimes leaders. 
Have we forgotten that in WWII and Korea and even in Vietnam we thought laying waste to cities was an acceptable and lawful means of war? 

Or is it only gentiles who are allowed to fight wars this way?  Of course, conventional weapons could be used if the US were to support our ally.

PS  And I think the Iranian nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.        

Lecture Notes
September 13, 2012 

To:  Mr. Romney
Subject:  Community Organizers 

As a former community organizer, (two years with Volunteers In Service To America), I think I can explain the difference between a corporate manager and a community organizer. Corporate managers seek resolutions of problems.  But the last thing a community organizer wants is a solution to the problems faced by his community.  The community organizer uses problems to rally his community.  If the problem is resolved then the community organizer must start all over again trying to find a way to motivate his “community” to organize around some new problem. 

You could call this leading from behind.   

Mr. Obama was criticized for allowing the House and Senate to write the Medical Reform Bill by themselves.  He lead from behind because he was not focusing on solving the Health Problem.  Rather his goal was to organize around the Health Problem.  He wanted the issue not the solution. 

Why did he demand another $400 billion at the last minute of negotiations of the budget with the Speaker of the House?  He didn’t want a solution to the budget he wanted the issue.  Why doesn’t he raise the quota on immigration from Mexico from the current 250,000 to a higher level?  Again he wants the issue to organize in this case the “Hispanic Community.”

 He knows as well as you that the Social Security System and Medicare are doomed unless action is taken.  But whereas you layout plans to solve this problem the Community Organizer in the Oval Room is using the fear of the elderly community to organize them into a political force.   Never the solution always the issues. 

PS  And I think the Iranian nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.      


Lecture Notes:  September 8, 2012
To:  Mr. Romney
Subject:    Believe what they tell you.

The most common statement from survivors of the Holocaust was:  “When the dictator says he is going to kill you --- believe him!”    The Iranian leaders must be believed.    They will exterminate the State of Israel if they are given a chance. 

Believe them. 
And remember a state of war exists between the United States and Iran.  Iran invaded the sovereign territory of the United States:  The embassy in Teheran.  

PS  And I think the Iranian nuclear program should be destroyed and the regime must be overthrown.     

August 31, 2011

"Shattered man" KGO --- Message heard understood acknowledged 

 

August 29, 2011  America Elects

The last time I was involved in politics I was targeted by Don Imus and Michael Weiner (AKA Michael Savage).  Howard Fineman, Chris Matthews, the late Tim Russert, Mark Shields, many others knew about the harassment but did nothing to help or even condemn the burglary, the stalking, the interference with employment all the rest.

What I learned form the experience:  Now I know why the world is heading for 11 billion, on a warming planet, a living hell.  If all this can happen to me for just writing some letters to the U. S. Senate about the importance of laser disks in education, the importance of self paced computer assisted education, then what are the chances of effecting really fundamental political change?

 

OPINION

JULY 22, 2010

Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege

America still owes a debt to its black citizens, but government programs to help all 'people of color' are unfair. They should end.

By JAMES WEBB

The NAACP believes the tea party is racist. The tea party believes the NAACP is racist. And Pat Buchanan got into trouble recently by pointing out that if Elena Kagan is confirmed to the Supreme Court, there will not be a single Protestant Justice, although Protestants make up half the U.S. population and dominated the court for generations.

Forty years ago, as the United States experienced the civil rights movement, the supposed monolith of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant dominance served as the whipping post for almost every debate about power and status in America. After a full generation of such debate, WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers. The time has come to cease the false arguments and allow every American the benefit of a fair chance at the future.

I have dedicated my political career to bringing fairness to America's economic system and to our work force, regardless of what people look like or where they may worship. Unfortunately, present-day diversity programs work against that notion, having expanded so far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not happen to be white.

In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.

How so?

Lyndon Johnson's initial program for affirmative action was based on the 13th Amendment and on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which authorized the federal government to take actions in order to eliminate "the badges of slavery." Affirmative action was designed to recognize the uniquely difficult journey of African-Americans. This policy was justifiable and understandable, even to those who came from white cultural groups that had also suffered in socio-economic terms from the Civil War and its aftermath.

The injustices endured by black Americans at the hands of their own government have no parallel in our history, not only during the period of slavery but also in the Jim Crow era that followed. But the extrapolation of this logic to all "people of color"—especially since 1965, when new immigration laws dramatically altered the demographic makeup of the U.S.—moved affirmative action away from remediation and toward discrimination, this time against whites. It has also lessened the focus on assisting African-Americans, who despite a veneer of successful people at the very top still experience high rates of poverty, drug abuse, incarceration and family breakup.

Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs. The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.

Contrary to assumptions in the law, white America is hardly a monolith. And the journey of white American cultures is so diverse (yes) that one strains to find the logic that could lump them together for the purpose of public policy.

The clearest example of today's misguided policies comes from examining the history of the American South.

The old South was a three-tiered society, with blacks and hard-put whites both dominated by white elites who manipulated racial tensions in order to retain power. At the height of slavery, in 1860, less than 5% of whites in the South owned slaves. The eminent black historian John Hope Franklin wrote that "fully three-fourths of the white people in the South had neither slaves nor an immediate economic interest in the maintenance of slavery."

The Civil War devastated the South, in human and economic terms. And from post-Civil War Reconstruction to the beginning of World War II, the region was a ravaged place, affecting black and white alike.

In 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt created a national commission to study what he termed "the long and ironic history of the despoiling of this truly American section." At that time, most industries in the South were owned by companies outside the region. Of the South's 1.8 million sharecroppers, 1.2 million were white (a mirror of the population, which was 71% white). The illiteracy rate was five times that of the North-Central states and more than twice that of New England and the Middle Atlantic (despite the waves of European immigrants then flowing to those regions). The total endowments of all the colleges and universities in the South were less than the endowments of Harvard and Yale alone. The average schoolchild in the South had $25 a year spent on his or her education, compared to $141 for children in New York.

Generations of such deficiencies do not disappear overnight, and they affect the momentum of a culture. In 1974, a National Opinion Research Center (NORC) study of white ethnic groups showed that white Baptists nationwide averaged only 10.7 years of education, a level almost identical to blacks' average of 10.6 years, and well below that of most other white groups. A recent NORC Social Survey of white adults born after World War II showed that in the years 1980-2000, only 18.4% of white Baptists and 21.8% of Irish Protestants—the principal ethnic group that settled the South—had obtained college degrees, compared to a national average of 30.1%, a Jewish average of 73.3%, and an average among those of Chinese and Indian descent of 61.9%.

Policy makers ignored such disparities within America's white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.

Where should we go from here? Beyond our continuing obligation to assist those African-Americans still in need, government-directed diversity programs should end.

Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes.

Memo to my fellow politicians: Drop the Procrustean policies and allow harmony to invade the public mindset. Fairness will happen, and bitterness will fade away.

Mr. Webb, a Democrat, is a U.S. senator from Virginia.

Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit

 

Enter subhead content here

Enter content here

Enter supporting content here