Great Scott!
Thomas Sowell
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Some of the most melancholy letters and e-mails that are sent to me are from people who lament that there is nothing they can do about the bad policies that they see ruining this country. They don't have any media outlet for their opinions and the letters they send to their Congressmen are either ignored or are answered by form letters with weasel words. They feel powerless.
Sometimes I remind them that the whole political establishment -- both Democrats and Republicans, as well as the mainstream media -- were behind amnesty for illegal immigrants, until the public opinion polls showed that the voters were not buying it. If politicians can't do anything else right, they can count votes.
It was the same story with the government's health care takeover legislation. The Democrats have such huge majorities in both houses of Congress that they could literally lock the Republicans out of the room where they were deciding what to do, set arbitrary deadlines for votes, and cut off debate in the Senate. The mainstream media was on board with this bill too. To hear the talking heads on TV, you would think it was a done deal.
Then Scott Brown got elected to the "Kennedy seat" in the Senate, showing that that seat was not the inheritance of any dynasty to pass on. Moreover, it showed that the voters were already fed up with the Obama administration, even in liberal Massachusetts, as well as in Virginia and New Jersey. The backtracking on health care began immediately. Politicians can count votes. Once again, the public was not helpless.
One seat did not deprive the Democrats of big majorities in Congress. But one seat was the difference between being able to shut off debate in the Senate and having to allow debate on what was in this massive legislation. From day one it was clear that concealing what was in this bill was the key to getting it passed.
That is why there had to be arbitrary deadlines-- first to get it passed before the August 2009 recess, then before Labor Day, then before the Christmas recess.
The President could wait months before deciding to give a general the troops he asked for to fight the war in Afghanistan but there was never to be enough time for the health care bill to be exposed in the light of day to the usual Congressional hearings and debate. Moreover, despite all the haste, the health care program would not actually go into effect until after the 2012 presidential election. In other words, the public was not supposed to find out whether the government's takeover of medical care actually made things better or worse until after it was too late.
Although even the members of Congress who voted on this massive legislation did not have time to read its thousands of pages, just the way it was being rushed through in the dark should have told us all we needed to know. For many voters, that turned out to be enough.
Even after Scott Brown came out of nowhere to make a stunning upset election victory, there were still some cute political tricks that could have been pulled to save the health care bill. But enough Democrats saw the handwriting on the wall that they were not going to risk their own re-election to save this bill that Barack Obama has been hell-bent to pass, even when polls showed repeatedly that the public didn't want it.
President Obama's desire to do something "historic" by succeeding, where previous presidents had failed, was perfectly consistent for a man consumed with his own ego satisfaction, rather than the welfare of the country or even of his own political party.
As for the public, it doesn't matter if your Congressman answers your letter with a form letter, or doesn't answer at all. What matters is that you let him know what you are for or against and, when enough people do that-- whether in letters, in polls or in an election, politicians get the message, because they know their jobs depend on it.
As for what is likely to happen to health care, neither the bill passed by the House of Representatives nor the Senate bill can be expected to be enacted into law. Meanwhile, Obama's reaction to his political setback has been to respond rhetorically and to call on the political operatives who helped engineer his successful election campaign in 2008. But the public did not know him then, and his rhetoric may not fool them again, now that they do.
January 26, 2010
January 22, 2010
Obama is anti-business ..................
Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. investors overwhelmingly see President Barack Obama as anti-business and question his ability to manage a financial crisis, according to a Bloomberg survey.
The global quarterly poll of investors and analysts finds that 77 percent of U.S. respondents believe Obama is too anti-business and four-out-of-five are only somewhat confident or not confident of his ability to handle a financial emergency.
“Investors no longer feel they can trust their instincts to take risks,” said poll respondent David Young, a managing director for a broker dealer in New York. Young cited Obama’s efforts to trim bonuses and earnings, make health care his top priority over jobs and plans to tax “the rich or advantaged.”
Carlos Vadillo, a fixed-income analyst at Wells Fargo Securities LLC in San Francisco, said Obama has been in a “constant war” with the banking system, using “fat-cat bankers” and other misnomers to describe a business model which supports a large portion of America.”
Unlike other recent presidents, Obama hasn’t selected a leading business executive for his cabinet or a top advisory role. One year after taking office, he is coping with a jobless rate hovering around 10 percent and a federal deficit that rose to $1.4 trillion last year. In response, he has proposed a fee on as many as 50 large financial firms and yesterday called for limiting the size and trading activities of financial institutions as a way to reduce risk-taking.
The poll was conducted Jan. 19, before Obama unveiled the plan. Yesterday, after the announcement, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index fell 1.9 percent, its biggest loss since Oct. 30.
The quarterly Bloomberg Global Poll of investors, traders and analysts in six continents was conducted by Selzer & Co. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
There is one other figure U.S. and international investors agree on: former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, a potential candidate for her party’s nomination in 2012.
Palin Rating
With a net favorability rating of 15 percent among all investors, Palin does best in the U.S., where she has the support of 27 percent of respondents. In Asia, it’s 14 percent, and in Europe just 5 percent of investors view her favorably.
Also this week—Obama’s approval index drops to -18…. ouch! Rough week to be a liberal
RASMUSSEN:
Obama Approval Index: -18
Strongly Approve 25%
Approve: 20%
Strongly Disapprove 43%
Disapprove: 12%
_______________________
Total Disapprove: 55%
The global quarterly poll of investors and analysts finds that 77 percent of U.S. respondents believe Obama is too anti-business and four-out-of-five are only somewhat confident or not confident of his ability to handle a financial emergency.
“Investors no longer feel they can trust their instincts to take risks,” said poll respondent David Young, a managing director for a broker dealer in New York. Young cited Obama’s efforts to trim bonuses and earnings, make health care his top priority over jobs and plans to tax “the rich or advantaged.”
Carlos Vadillo, a fixed-income analyst at Wells Fargo Securities LLC in San Francisco, said Obama has been in a “constant war” with the banking system, using “fat-cat bankers” and other misnomers to describe a business model which supports a large portion of America.”
Unlike other recent presidents, Obama hasn’t selected a leading business executive for his cabinet or a top advisory role. One year after taking office, he is coping with a jobless rate hovering around 10 percent and a federal deficit that rose to $1.4 trillion last year. In response, he has proposed a fee on as many as 50 large financial firms and yesterday called for limiting the size and trading activities of financial institutions as a way to reduce risk-taking.
The poll was conducted Jan. 19, before Obama unveiled the plan. Yesterday, after the announcement, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index fell 1.9 percent, its biggest loss since Oct. 30.
The quarterly Bloomberg Global Poll of investors, traders and analysts in six continents was conducted by Selzer & Co. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
There is one other figure U.S. and international investors agree on: former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, a potential candidate for her party’s nomination in 2012.
Palin Rating
With a net favorability rating of 15 percent among all investors, Palin does best in the U.S., where she has the support of 27 percent of respondents. In Asia, it’s 14 percent, and in Europe just 5 percent of investors view her favorably.
Also this week—Obama’s approval index drops to -18…. ouch! Rough week to be a liberal
RASMUSSEN:
Obama Approval Index: -18
Strongly Approve 25%
Approve: 20%
Strongly Disapprove 43%
Disapprove: 12%
_______________________
Total Disapprove: 55%
January 15, 2010
I broke the Dam...........
Pat Robertson Embarrassed Christians everywhere when he claimed that the Haitian Earthquake was the result of a “Deal with the Devil”. This is exactly the kind of crap statement that makes people think Christians are stupid, and/or dangerous. It’s a completely nonsensical statement that always comes from some moronic Christian after a terrible tragedy.
Luckily for Christians though, the religion of Global warming has stepped up to the plate to show people that every religion has its own babbling morons.
Actor Danny Glover came out yesterday and claimed that the earthquake in Haiti was caused by ….GLOBAL WARMING !!!! (“I broke the Dam”). He believes that the death and destruction wrought throughout Haiti was a result of the lack of progress at the Copenhagen Climate Summit
Says Glover: “When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin’?
I totally know what you sayin, Dog. It’s like…. why ain’t people gettin it? This what happens when ya not listen’n ta what we talkin’bout.
Luckily for Christians though, the religion of Global warming has stepped up to the plate to show people that every religion has its own babbling morons.
Actor Danny Glover came out yesterday and claimed that the earthquake in Haiti was caused by ….GLOBAL WARMING !!!! (“I broke the Dam”). He believes that the death and destruction wrought throughout Haiti was a result of the lack of progress at the Copenhagen Climate Summit
Says Glover: “When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin’?
I totally know what you sayin, Dog. It’s like…. why ain’t people gettin it? This what happens when ya not listen’n ta what we talkin’bout.
January 13, 2010
Disaster in Haiti
I saw this post on the anti-strib--couldn't agree with it more. If you feel the urge to help, please do...they need all the resources they can get.
Give to Haiti
Posted by: Kermit at http://www.anti-strib.com/blog/give-to-haiti.html
Jan 13, 2010
Yesterday Haiti suffered a massive earthquake. The country is dirt poor and ill equipped to handle an emergency of this nature. The civilized world should do what it can by way of humanitarian aid to help.
The two things they need right now are physical support in the form of emergency services, including hospital ships, and money. If you feel like donating disaster relief I recommend giving to established international charities that already have infrastructure for swift action. I will be sending some cash to Lutheran World Relief. Catholic Charities and Feed the Children are other reliable venues for aid.
This is an excellent opportunity for President Obama to step up. He should act swiftly by sending in American military personnel to aid in the medical and security situations. It will also be interesting to see how the Organization of American States responds. Time is of the essence.
Will our Socialist neighbors act on their principles and contribute? Let's see what Cuba, Venezuela and Brazil do in this situation. I know that Americans will respond as they did when the massive earthquake pulverized Gujarat in India and the tsunami wiped out large parts of South Asia and Indonesia. This is an opportunity for the best part of our nature to be exercized.
Give to Haiti
Posted by: Kermit at http://www.anti-strib.com/blog/give-to-haiti.html
Jan 13, 2010
Yesterday Haiti suffered a massive earthquake. The country is dirt poor and ill equipped to handle an emergency of this nature. The civilized world should do what it can by way of humanitarian aid to help.
The two things they need right now are physical support in the form of emergency services, including hospital ships, and money. If you feel like donating disaster relief I recommend giving to established international charities that already have infrastructure for swift action. I will be sending some cash to Lutheran World Relief. Catholic Charities and Feed the Children are other reliable venues for aid.
This is an excellent opportunity for President Obama to step up. He should act swiftly by sending in American military personnel to aid in the medical and security situations. It will also be interesting to see how the Organization of American States responds. Time is of the essence.
Will our Socialist neighbors act on their principles and contribute? Let's see what Cuba, Venezuela and Brazil do in this situation. I know that Americans will respond as they did when the massive earthquake pulverized Gujarat in India and the tsunami wiped out large parts of South Asia and Indonesia. This is an opportunity for the best part of our nature to be exercized.
January 12, 2010
Airport security and terrorism
All of the debate on how to handle terrorism and air travel is really starting to get on my nerves. People on the right are blaming Obama for every attempted plot, even if he is not responsible. People on the left are preaching tolerance and diversity while simultaneously claiming we are safer then ever before. All of this segues to the purchase of around 400 full body scanners that has some people up in arms, and others wondering "what's the big deal".
Obama didn't let the underwear bomber on the plane. But it was a failure that he wasn't on the no-fly list. Full body Scanners have potential to make flying safer, but some people find it to be an invasion of privacy.
This whole issue is far simpler than anyone wants to admit. I personally have no problems with the body scanners, I just don't know how effective they'll be in preventing terrorist. The real issue for me, is how our concern over political correctness is blinding us of what is so simple. We are ignoring the most obvious and cheapest security measure we could try. The one thing we could do that would make air travel infinitely more secure.....Passenger PROFILING.
Profiling works, because most terrorist fit a particular PROFILE......... But of course that is racist and intolerant, so we will continue to pat down 90 year old grandmothers traveling from Florida to Iowa (Thank God they checked into that crazy lady, eh?). I hate to break it to those fighting for social justice, but frisking women over the age of 90 is stupid and accomplishes nothing. It doesn't deter terrorists, it just gives everyone an excuse to laugh at the ridiculous spectacle that has forced them to be 3 hours early for a flight. Here's an idea that may shock you: instead of random screening and frisking old ladies, we could check out the dude chanting “Allah akbar” and wearing a towel on his head? Offensive I know, but that doesn't make it any less logical.
ISLAMIC terrorism is the threat we are currently faced with, end of story. It's not that all Muslims are terrorist, or that those who are not Muslim should get a free pass. But, ANYONE (white, black yellow, whatever) fitting a profile that would raise alarms should go through a more strict pre-flight protocol. It may not be fair to innocent Muslims, but life isn't fair.
It's not racist, it's common sense. If people dont like it, they can hear the same excuse the entire county is now hearing regarding the body scanners----"Don't like it? Don't fly"--. I'm sorry that Muslim people feel like they are being singled out in terrorism, but their feelings are collateral damage of historical realities. We have had two Islamic terrorists attempt attacks in the last 6 months. We are at war with basically the entire Middle East, and we we were attacked on 9/11. It is irresponsible not to take these issues into account.
It is ludicrous to ignore the common characteristics of terrorists, even if it is offensive. We cannot sacrifice our common sense to our social habit of patronizing minorities. It's time to buck up, and simply acknowledge that Islamic extremist exist, and they are a bigger threat then elderly women.
Obama didn't let the underwear bomber on the plane. But it was a failure that he wasn't on the no-fly list. Full body Scanners have potential to make flying safer, but some people find it to be an invasion of privacy.
This whole issue is far simpler than anyone wants to admit. I personally have no problems with the body scanners, I just don't know how effective they'll be in preventing terrorist. The real issue for me, is how our concern over political correctness is blinding us of what is so simple. We are ignoring the most obvious and cheapest security measure we could try. The one thing we could do that would make air travel infinitely more secure.....Passenger PROFILING.
Profiling works, because most terrorist fit a particular PROFILE......... But of course that is racist and intolerant, so we will continue to pat down 90 year old grandmothers traveling from Florida to Iowa (Thank God they checked into that crazy lady, eh?). I hate to break it to those fighting for social justice, but frisking women over the age of 90 is stupid and accomplishes nothing. It doesn't deter terrorists, it just gives everyone an excuse to laugh at the ridiculous spectacle that has forced them to be 3 hours early for a flight. Here's an idea that may shock you: instead of random screening and frisking old ladies, we could check out the dude chanting “Allah akbar” and wearing a towel on his head? Offensive I know, but that doesn't make it any less logical.
ISLAMIC terrorism is the threat we are currently faced with, end of story. It's not that all Muslims are terrorist, or that those who are not Muslim should get a free pass. But, ANYONE (white, black yellow, whatever) fitting a profile that would raise alarms should go through a more strict pre-flight protocol. It may not be fair to innocent Muslims, but life isn't fair.
It's not racist, it's common sense. If people dont like it, they can hear the same excuse the entire county is now hearing regarding the body scanners----"Don't like it? Don't fly"--. I'm sorry that Muslim people feel like they are being singled out in terrorism, but their feelings are collateral damage of historical realities. We have had two Islamic terrorists attempt attacks in the last 6 months. We are at war with basically the entire Middle East, and we we were attacked on 9/11. It is irresponsible not to take these issues into account.
It is ludicrous to ignore the common characteristics of terrorists, even if it is offensive. We cannot sacrifice our common sense to our social habit of patronizing minorities. It's time to buck up, and simply acknowledge that Islamic extremist exist, and they are a bigger threat then elderly women.
January 9, 2010
From Before It's News.com: 401k/IRA Screw Job Coming?
In a short conversation this noontime that CNBC apparently has omitted from their archives (Why's that folks?) Rick Santelli was talking about a potential to effectively force money into the Treasury market.
The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.
Let me tell you what this is - it is an attempt to prevent the collapse of the Treasury market!
Forcing people into Treasuries as an "annuity" is exactly what Social Security allegedly is. Except that Treasury stole the money that was collected in FICA taxes and spent it!
Guess what? They'll do that here too - you're going to "invest" in Treasuries which of course are effectively a CALL option on the future taxing ability of the government.
The problem is that with an aging population and the immigrant problem (illegal immigrants that is), along with offshoring, the aggregate wage base will drop and thus this is the most dangerous investment of all!
What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI - the "inflation index" - as they have for the last 30 years) so as to guarantee that you lose over time compared to actual purchasing power.
THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE THE 1980s AND IT WILL NOT CHANGE!
I have been talking about this for quite some time and recall writing a Ticker on it a year or more ago, although I can't find the entry immediately.
Let me be clear:
I have no quarrel with the government mandating that you have a choice in your IRA or 401k account to buy short-duration Treasuries - much like the "G" fund that government and civil-service workers have.
But - "choices" have a funny way of turning into mandates, and this looks to me like a raw admission that Treasury knows it will not be able to sell its debt in the open market - so they will effectively tax you by forcing your "retirement" money to buy them!
This may be the only way for Treasury to hold down interest rates to something reasonable in the intermediate term, but doing so will instantaneously remove a major source of funding for the stock market - that is, the monthly and quarterly inflows from retirement accounts.
You can bet this won't be good for you, the ordinary American.
You can also bet that once such an "option" is made available there is a very high probability of the government doing things that either promote or simply don't stand in the way of another stock market crash as a means of "herding" your money into Treasuries - so they can blow it - all under the guise of being allegedly "safe".
Of course this begs the question - what is the government can't pay down the road when you retire, just as they can't pay on a forward basis with Social Security and Medicare?
This "proposal" can only mean one thing - Treasury smells smoke. Maybe you should pay attention to what they're huffing!
And before you say "oh they'd never do that" I want you to read this:
Forcing people into Treasuries as an "annuity" is exactly what Social Security allegedly is. Except that Treasury stole the money that was collected in FICA taxes and spent it!
Guess what? They'll do that here too - you're going to "invest" in Treasuries which of course are effectively a CALL option on the future taxing ability of the government.
The problem is that with an aging population and the immigrant problem (illegal immigrants that is), along with offshoring, the aggregate wage base will drop and thus this is the most dangerous investment of all!
What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI - the "inflation index" - as they have for the last 30 years) so as to guarantee that you lose over time compared to actual purchasing power.
THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE THE 1980s AND IT WILL NOT CHANGE!
I have been talking about this for quite some time and recall writing a Ticker on it a year or more ago, although I can't find the entry immediately.
Let me be clear:
I have no quarrel with the government mandating that you have a choice in your IRA or 401k account to buy short-duration Treasuries - much like the "G" fund that government and civil-service workers have.
But - "choices" have a funny way of turning into mandates, and this looks to me like a raw admission that Treasury knows it will not be able to sell its debt in the open market - so they will effectively tax you by forcing your "retirement" money to buy them!
This may be the only way for Treasury to hold down interest rates to something reasonable in the intermediate term, but doing so will instantaneously remove a major source of funding for the stock market - that is, the monthly and quarterly inflows from retirement accounts.
You can bet this won't be good for you, the ordinary American.
You can also bet that once such an "option" is made available there is a very high probability of the government doing things that either promote or simply don't stand in the way of another stock market crash as a means of "herding" your money into Treasuries - so they can blow it - all under the guise of being allegedly "safe".
Of course this begs the question - what is the government can't pay down the road when you retire, just as they can't pay on a forward basis with Social Security and Medicare?
This "proposal" can only mean one thing - Treasury smells smoke. Maybe you should pay attention to what they're huffing!
And before you say "oh they'd never do that" I want you to read this:
Here is a warning to us all. The Argentine state is taking control of the country’s privately-managed pension funds in a drastic move to raise cash.
...
My fear is that governments in the US, Britain, and Europe will display similar reflexes. Indeed, they have already done so. The forced-feeding of banks with fresh capital – whether they want it or not – and the seizure of the Fannie/Freddie mortgage giants before they were in fact in trouble (in order to prevent a Chinese buying strike of US bonds and prevent a spike in US mortgage rates), shows that private property can be co-opted – or eliminated – with little due process if that is required to serve the collective welfare.
Any questions?
PS: If the video shows up I'll update this ticker.... and if you're wondering what hammered the dollar starting at about 9:00 today, this is probably it. Such a "move" would free the government to further abuse the issuance of Treasuries rather than take necessary austerity steps and places us even further down the road toward a political and economic collapse.
PS: If the video shows up I'll update this ticker.... and if you're wondering what hammered the dollar starting at about 9:00 today, this is probably it. Such a "move" would free the government to further abuse the issuance of Treasuries rather than take necessary austerity steps and places us even further down the road toward a political and economic collapse.
January 7, 2010
January 6, 2010
AP sources: Obama OKs taxing high-end health plans
So mush for another Obama promise. Not that he hadn't already broken the pledge to not raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000.00 a year. But multiple times in less than one year may be pushing it. Even for the "Chosen One". I personally like this idea. But then again, anything that pisses off government unions is probably going to win my approval....... Plus, it's really gonna piss off Nancy Pelosi, and that will be fun to watch. For all those who believed the Obama of the campaign trail, it may be time to swallow a dose of reality............... But your not aloud to complain, because there is no way that nobody warned you.
AP sources: Obama OKs taxing high-end health plans
By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press WriterWed Jan 6, 6:52 pm ETWASHINGTON – President Barack Obama signaled to House Democratic leaders Wednesday that they'll have to drop their opposition to taxing high-end health insurance plans to pay for health coverage for millions of uninsured Americans.
Transparency?????????
In 2008, Nancy Pelosi vowed that the Democratic Congress would be the most transparent in American History. President Barrack Obama made similar promises in his presidential campaign. He recently promised televised hearings on healthcare reform, and also public postings of legislation 3 days before any votes. Brietbart.com has him on video, promising 8 different times that the healthcare discussions would be televised. The response from those two hacks today ……..….. T.S! Obama and Pelosi are anything but transparent. They are operating the most cryptic and underhanded federal government since Woodrow Wilson. Democrats have reverted to Mob tactics in passing their agenda's, and see any opposition as racist, country jargon.
Nancy Pelosi came out just yesterday, and actually claimed that this was the most transparent process in American history! Really? Lets take a look at that.
The Senate and House are pushing healthcare reform bills that are 2,700 pages long, and almost none of them have even read them The excuse for not reading the bills....... "They wouldn’t understand it anyways." These bills are written in legalese and are filled with references to previous statutes that even the people passing the bills are unable to understand. But don't worry; they seem to get the gist of it.
When our own representatives don't understand what they are passing, how are the American people supposed to?
January 5, 2010
Why the French suck..............
The country of France has introduced a new law which aims at banning "Psychological Violence" in Marriages. You may be asking yourself, 'What exactly does that mean ?'
Mostly, it means that France is retarded. Prime Minister Francois Fillon announced the law saying it would also apply to co-habitating couples (Not that there's anything wrong with that). The law states that people will now receive criminal records for insulting loved ones during domestic disputes. Electronic Tagging would then be used for repeat offenders. The law is intended to protect woman, who evidently can't handle name calling, from attacks ranging from off-hand comments about their appearance to threats of violence. The Prime Minister went on to say" It's an important step forward as the creation of this office will allow us to deal with the most insidious situations-situations that leave no visible scars, but which leave the victims torn up inside." The government of France will be experimenting with electronic surveillance measures to monitor the effectiveness of this program.
Psychologist Anne Giraud stated the obvious in her critic of this moronic level ineptitude stating: "Squabbling couples will allege all kinds of things about each other, but they won't necessarily be true. The police are likely to be called out more and more when this law comes into force this year, but often it will be a case of one person's word against the other. Psychological violence is a very serious matter, but punishing it through the courts is a very different matter altogether.
Clearly Anne Giraud is a self hating sexist for not supporting the "right to self esteem act of 2010".
Mostly, it means that France is retarded. Prime Minister Francois Fillon announced the law saying it would also apply to co-habitating couples (Not that there's anything wrong with that). The law states that people will now receive criminal records for insulting loved ones during domestic disputes. Electronic Tagging would then be used for repeat offenders. The law is intended to protect woman, who evidently can't handle name calling, from attacks ranging from off-hand comments about their appearance to threats of violence. The Prime Minister went on to say" It's an important step forward as the creation of this office will allow us to deal with the most insidious situations-situations that leave no visible scars, but which leave the victims torn up inside." The government of France will be experimenting with electronic surveillance measures to monitor the effectiveness of this program.
Psychologist Anne Giraud stated the obvious in her critic of this moronic level ineptitude stating: "Squabbling couples will allege all kinds of things about each other, but they won't necessarily be true. The police are likely to be called out more and more when this law comes into force this year, but often it will be a case of one person's word against the other. Psychological violence is a very serious matter, but punishing it through the courts is a very different matter altogether.
Clearly Anne Giraud is a self hating sexist for not supporting the "right to self esteem act of 2010".
Intellectuals and Society
Thomas Sowell has published another book titled “Intellectuals and Society”. It was published yesterday on January 4, and even though I haven’t read it I highly recommend it :) In support of Mr. Sowell’s latest work, I am posting his most recent Townhall article which gives an overview of what you can expect in the book.
Intellectuals and Society
Thomas Sowell
Tuesday, January 05, 2010
There has probably never been an era in history when intellectuals have played a larger role in society. When intellectuals who generate ideas are surrounded by a wide range of others who disseminate those ideas-- whether as journalists, teachers, staffers to legislators or clerks to judges-- the influence of intellectuals on the way a society evolves can be huge. Trying for years to understand the nature of that influence eventually led me to write the book "Intellectuals and Society," which has just been published.
Intellectuals generate ideas and ideas matter, whether those ideas are right or wrong, and they matter far beyond the small segment of society who are intellectuals. Ideas affect the fate of whole nations and civilizations. Nowhere is that more true than in our own times, when some people make suicidal attacks to kill strangers who have done nothing to them, as on 9/11, because the attackers are consumed with a set of ideas-- a vision-- and driven by the emotions generated by those ideas and that vision.
Whether in war or peace, and whether in economics or religion, something as intangible as ideas can dominate the most concrete things in our lives. What Karl Marx called "the blaze of ideas" has set whole nations on fire and consumed whole generations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
