"An Overreaching Underachiever"

"The Federal government has become what it is - an overreaching underachiever - partly because so many legislators seem to believe that every good idea should become a federal program and every bad idea should become a federal crime."

George Will

Time Warner Cable is moving toward metering and capping internet usage for its subscribers. New York Democratic Rep. and liberal DailyKos blogger Eric Massa calls this an "outrageous plan to tax the American people."

I'm not a big fan of the idea either, but this is exactly the kind of problem that the free market will solve on its own. Consider the two possibilities:

1. The company is telling the truth about its costs being inflated by a small percentage of voracious downoaders, or 
   
2. They are exaggerating the costs, and they will be punished by the market as their customers leave for a competitor with a reasonable pricing structure. 
   

If (1.) is true, then the proposed legislation only serves to make the internet provider business unprofitable, leading to higher flat rates for everyone. If (2.) is the case, the legislation would be completely unneccessary, but it wouldn't be repealed and would clog the books for forever or so.

In reality, I think the cable companies really want to cap usage for a self-serving reason: they want to make sure people don't use the internet to watch TV and thus cannibalize their main business.

Of course, the good congressman will get what he wants out of the situation: to be perceived as a crusader for the little guy.

Political Dirty Tricks: or, How To Become a Felon

This guy went to federal prison on charges of phone harrassment, and is living proof that it isn't just left-wingers who engage in election fraud.

...Although I think that dead people and cartoon characters can still be considered solid Democrat constituencies.

The former Republican political operative went to federal prison after he pleaded guilty to charges of phone harassment. He jammed the phone lines of New Hampshire's Democratic Party on Election Day six years ago.

"The concept was to disrupt lines of communication. That's a fancy way of saying, 'make it so the phones didn't work,' " Raymond said recently. "No calls going out. No calls going in."

Hitler, the KKK, and Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood has done a pretty good job distancing their organization from the philosophy of their founder Margaret Sanger, a supporter of eugenics and a proponent of the removal of "human weeds".  Perhaps history's most ardent eugenicists?  The Nazis.  In fact:

During the 1930s and 1940s, the Nazi regime forcibly sterilized hundreds of thousands of people whom they viewed as mentally and physically "unfit", an estimated 400,000 between 1934 and 1937. The scale of the Nazi program prompted one American eugenics advocate to seek an expansion of their program, with one complaining that "the Germans are beating us at our own game".

Apparently folks today prefer to remember her as a heroic supporter of the rights of the regular folks to obtain contraceptives, and prefer to forget that she was well received after speaking to the Ku Klux Klan:

"I accepted an invitation to talk to the women's branch of the Ku Klux Klan...I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses...I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak...In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered." (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

So, count me out when you're celebrating the 92nd anniversary of the Margaret Sanger's first clinic.

RPT Makes Nueces County "Problem" Go Away

As I mentioned in my last post, this year's Nueces County Convention was a flagrant abuse of rules and delegates, and the Republican Party of Texas (RPT) has supported the chairman who perpetrated it. The delegates who unsuccessfully opposed the chairman held their own convention, and it is the job of the RPT's Credentials Committee to review the evidence and decide which delegation to allow to participate in the State Convention.

Various committees have been meeting since Monday, but Credentials didn't meet until today at 11am, planning to spend only 2 hours reviewing 78 credentials challenges (the most since 1976, when Reagan conservatives new to the GOP scene were being accused of trying to "destroy the party"). Although each of Texas' Senatorial Districts sends a delegate to make up this committee, the chairman of the Credentials Committee (appointed by RPT State Chairman Tina Benkiser) didn't even bother to take votes from his committee; he simply pronounced his judgment on each case.

As for Nueces County, he rejected the rump convention and seated the County Chairman's delegation on a highly dubious technicality, claiming that the rump convention didn't officially notify the other delegation that they would be challenging them. However, it is clear that the RPT learned something from this situation: the Credentials Committee passed a rule for the meeting excluding all recording equipment.

In other news, the Nueces County rump convention delegates have finally been able to review the records from the convention they left (thanks to a court order), and they have more information about the delegates who outvoted them:

"We believe at least 36 delegates failed to vote in the Republican Primary, which would make them ineligible to serve in the capacity of delegate," said Vanessa Cahill. "Another 36 of the delegates appear to have been added at the Nueces County Convention, by members of the Credential Committee. The Credentials Committee Chairman actually appears to be among the names added."

There will probably be an effort tomorrow during the first general session to change the order of the convention from the floor and elect a convention chairman who would allow this issue to be revisited, but it has little chance of succeeding. I think it's fair to say that justice was not served here.

Texas GOP Convention: Republicans Mix It Up

The Republican Party of Texas holds its 2008 Convention this week. (If you're new to all of this, you may want to check out my posts on Republican party officials and on the Republican convention process.) In contrast to most State Conventions over the past 20 years or so, this one may feature some major battles. I'm sifting through email, websites and blogs to get to the bottom of it, and here's what I'm finding.

There are allegations of illegal actions in several counties around Texas, where County Chairmen attempted to pack their County/Senatorial District (SD) conventions with ineligible delegates or prevent duly elected delegates from attending, and several who were accused of wrongdoing indicated that they had the support of the State Chairman. The most egregious of the violations (Nueces County) was captured on audio:

(Speaking as a delegate to many conventions, that is by far the most flagrant abuse of rules that I have ever heard.) A rump convention was held, where the delegates who believed that the rules were not followed held their own convention and elected their own group of delegates to the State Convention. Because there were two conventions held in Nueces County, a committee of the State Convention must choose which convention to accept--especially, which group of delegates to State will be seated.

The Nueces County situation highlights a huge problem at the State Convention. Since 1998, the State Convention has not finished organizing the convention (electing the permanent officers of the convention and finalizing the delegates who will be seated) until later in the convention. This allows more time at the podium for the State Chairman (who, by law, serves as Temporary Chairman and is often running for reelection) while allowing the Chairman to have another person serve as Permanent Chairman of the Convention during the often contentious debate that occurs later in the convention. Unfortunately, according to the Texas Election Code (TEC), this is also illegal. It also disenfranchises all of the delegates of Nueces County, as former Texas RNC Committeeman Tim Lambert notes in this blog entry:

Why does it matter? RPT rules (27d) require that delegations that have been challenged are not seated until their challenge is resolved. When the Credentials Committee report is not presented until after the vote for SREC members and nominations of Chair and Vice Chair of the party, those delegates' right to vote will be violated, because by the time they are seated, their opportunity to vote for SREC, State Chair and Vice Chair will have already passed.

A restraining order has been granted, been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and is being refiled to force the Republican Party of Texas (RPT) to order its convention according to the TEC. Amazingly, the RPT under the direction of current Chairman Tina Benkiser, is vigorously fighting these legal challenges. The TEC is very clear that the convention must be organized before business is conducted. Even though each SD will have elected their SREC members and nominated a Chair and Vice Chair before the convention is officially organized, RPT lawyers are arguing, apparently with straight faces, that no convention business will have been conducted. The fact that the RPT's case is so weak, coupled with the fact that Chairman Benkiser is apparently dragging her feet, seems to indicate that the party is simply trying to delay the conclusion of the legal actions past Thursday, when the point becomes moot.

Perhaps even more disturbing than the situation with the order of the convention is the fact the the RPT is supporting the Nueces County Chairman, who refused to disclose the precinct convention minutes that would have made it clear that he added 100 unelected delegates. As Tim Lambert notes:

The RPT, under the direction of the current chairman, went to court to defend the illegal actions of the rogue county chairman and sought to punish the delegate seeking relief. The current state chair advised this county chairman and others that they were not required to release convention minutes, contrary to RPT rule 22b and the TEC.

There is one thing that many of the delegates who have been excluded and mistreated have in common: they were supporters of Ron Paul's presidential bid. While I didn't vote for Paul, I find this behavior despicable. To attempt to illegally silence someone because of their support for a candidate is completely insupportable. Benkiser is now being opposed by Paul Perry in her reelection bid, and I will wholeheartedly support his bid.

Texas GOP Conventions: An Overview

The Republican Party holds its 2008 Convention this week, so it's a great time to give an overview of how the GOP works in Texas. I've already covered the Republican party officials who represent Republican voters in their areas. Now we'll look at the Republican conventions, where Republican voters attend conventions and represent themselves.

During even-numbered years, Texas Republicans hold a series of conventions at several levels: Precinct (neighborhoods), County/Senatorial District (depending on your area--some Counties are too big to hold a single convention), State, and finally the National Convention. The participants are always Republican voters who voted in the most recent GOP primary.

At each level, the convention is considered to be the Republican Party of the area (Precinct, County, etc.) they represent--their decisions establish the will and focus of Republican Party voters. Each convention does at least two things:

1. Elect delegates to represent the area at the next highest convention
2. Establish a "platform" that represents the views of the Party in that area

The larger the convention, the more work must be accomplished by committees before the majority of the delegates arrive. At Precinct Conventions, everything is handled at the convention, since there are usually just a handful of voters who show up, elect each other and a few neighbors to the County/Senatorial District Convention and sometimes present a resolution or two. By the State Convention, committees work up to 18 hours/day for 3 or 4 days before the majority of the delegates even arrive, sorting out the thousands of delegates to take part and reviewing hundreds of resolutions that will be whittled down to compose the Texas Republican Party Platform--among other things.

At the State Convention, an addition to electing delegates to the National Convention and adopting a platform, party officials on the Senatorial District, State, and National levels are elected as well--see this post for more on that.

At many State and National Conventions (as well as some County/Senatorial Conventions), there is a tension between two groups: Republican delegates and Republican officeholders. This is because the delegates often want to make their voices heard on a variety of subjects, some of which may be difficult or even embarrassing for officeholders from those districts. Conversely, State Representatives, Governors and Senators would all prefer that the coverage of this gathering of Republican activists from their districts be glowing in praise for those officeholders.

The focus of this tension is often on the Chairman. At State Conventions when a chairman is being elected, there will usually be a "grassroots" candidate who pledges allegiance to the average voter/delegates, running against an "establishment" candidate supported by the Governor or Presidential nominee, whose unspoken agenda will be to avoid embarrassment for those high elected officials from the State Conventions or SREC. For the past 15-20 years at the Texas State Convention, there have been very few differences of opinion between candidates on issues like fiscal conservatism, foreign policy or abortion--the choice is always about "management style".

Historically, there was a great amount of actual business transacted at party Conventions; party insiders at National Conventions actually chose nominees for President and Vice-President in "smoke-filled back rooms." In today's TV era, where sound bites reign supreme, parties want their conventions to be devoid of controversy and conflict, instead serving as rallies for the faithful and as a coronation for their nominees for high office. This also exacerbates the tension between the average delegates, who wish to speak their mind, and the Chairman, who would prefer a smooth, camera-friendly event without any infighting.

Next up: a preview of the 2008 Convention.

Texas Republican Party Officials: An Overview

In conjunction with this week's 2008 Republican Party Convention, I'm doing some overviews of how the GOP works in Texas.

At every level, from neighborhoods to the entire nation, Republicans elect individuals to represent their areas in the time between the elections which are held every two years. Those representatives then serve as part of a body headed by an elected chairman, in much the same way a company's board works with its CEO. The body represents Republican voters in various capacities, often including public relations, fundraising, lobbying of officials, and in some cases even filling Republican ballot vacancies left by death or withdrawal. While their functions differ, the bodies on various levels are very similar. Here is an overview, from the lowest level to the highest:

• Republican voters, in their biennial primaries, elect Precinct Chairmen from each neighborhood and a County Chairman for the entire county. The Precinct Chairs form a countywide Executive Committee headed by the County Chairman and together represent the Republicans of their County.
• Republican voters, in Senatorial District caucuses held at the biennial State Convention, elect a Committeeman and a Committeewoman to represent them on the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC).
• Republican voters, at the State Convention, elect a State Chairman to chair the SREC (and also run the state party, which has a staff and headquarters).
  
• Republican voters, at the State Convention, also elect a National Committeeman and Committeewoman to represent the state (along with the State Chairman) on the Republican National Committee (RNC)
• RNC members elect a Chairman to chair the RNC and lead the national party.

As you can see, the State Convention is a very important part of the process; many party officials are chosen there that will remain in office for at least two years (until the next State Convention), and in some cases for four-year terms. Next up: an overview of the GOP Convention process.

The Creation of Yao Ming

I've heard that Yao Ming's parents were forced to marry by the communist leaders of China in hopes of producing a basketball prodigy. I found an article (which is actually a book excerpt) from TimeAsia magazine that gives the whole story on that, as well as Yao's story starting with his mother's youth and going through to his playing days with the NBA's Houston Rockets--all in 8 interesting pages.

As to the forced marriage? According to the article, it was an "arranged" marriage that they were "encouraged" to enter. Perhaps "forced" is too strong, but maybe not...

Obama vs. Wright on Race

Thomas Sowell has an interesting take on the differences between Barack Obama and his former pastor Jeremiah Wright. Sowell believes that Wright whips up resentment while Obama sells a sense of entitlement, but both are telling basically the same story:

The difference between Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright is that they are addressing different audiences, using different styles adapted to those audiences.

It is a difference between upscale demagoguery and ghetto demagoguery, playing the audience for suckers in both cases.

Sowell, who is a black man from Harlem, tells three random stories:

• South Korean schoolgirls studying 15 hours a day to get into top colleges;
  
• a Harvard classmate who refused to ask his parents for new shoes he needed but that they couldn't afford;
  
• a childhood friend who literally spit food out of his mouth when he realized it was given to him out of charity.

He ties them together thusly:

People on the far left like to flatter themselves that they are for the poor and the downtrodden. But what is most likely to lift people out of poverty-- telling them that the world has done them wrong or promoting the work ethic of the Korean girls, the dogged determination of my Harvard classmate with the newspaper in his shoe, or the self-reliance of my fellow junior high school student in Harlem who had too much pride to take charity?

Be sure to check out the article.

Taxing the Rich

It's election season, so the various candidates pull out their go-to rhetoric and we hear vague truisms about very complex issues like taxations shouted at us a lot. I found a very interesting breakdown for 2005, the most recent year for which breakdowns are available.

Before you check it out, ask yourself if you can answer some basic questions about the current tax structure in the US:

1. What percentage does the average American pay in federal income tax?
2. What percentage of Americans filing income tax returns didn't end up paying any?
3. Are you rich?

This article hits those points, and plenty of others, and it's interesting stuff. The 2005 answers to the above questions are 13.6%, 32.6%, and you're rich if you made 61,055 or more (if you define rich as the top 25% of Americans).

I don't know about you but my target income is above 61K, so remember next time you vote to soak the rich that it could be you and me.

The Truth about NAFTA

I've linked to an interesting (and short) article in the Wall Street Journal that compares the two big states that had primaries yesterday, Texas and Ohio. Democrats have been decrying NAFTA and promising manufacturing jobs in Ohio, but that hasn't come up in Texas because it has greatly benefited from that trade agreement. This article makes it clear that NAFTA isn't the culprit behind Ohio's problems--it's more about high income taxes and very pro-union laws. Apparently, the manufacturing jobs leaving Ohio aren't all heading overseas, but to pro-business states like...Texas!

By the way, the practice of blatantly lying to voters and telling them what they want to hear in order to get their votes is one of the main reasons people hate politicians. There has been talk that Obama and Clinton will try to "renegotiate" NAFTA, but it's obvious given the facts in this article that that will never happen. It was all theater to make it seem like the Democratic Presidential candidates could fix a problem that is actually caused by Ohio corporate tax laws designed to "soak rich corporations" and by other Ohio laws designed to protect unions (which are of course themselves supposed to protect their members).

Ah, politics.

Liberals and Self-Loathing

Michelle Obama, wife of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, made some waves a couple of weeks ago when she said "...for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country..." It wasn't an accidental slip of the tongue; she said the same thing in two different speeches, so it seems to have been part of her prepared remarks.

This fits with a theory I've been developing: it seems that self-loathing is an important part of the liberal mindset. The above statement implies that Mrs. Obama, an American, has spent her entire adult life ashamed of America. In fact, today's liberal is ashamed and outraged about America's treatment of countless groups, including: Native Americans, African-Americans, women, homosexuals, illegal immigrants, suspected terrorists, and blue-collar workers.

But America isn't the only target of liberal loathing. Radical environmentalist rhetoric expresses shame on the part of the entire human race (of which radical environmentalists, of course, are part) for our treatment of the planet; rich liberals decry "big business" while at the same time profiting from it; and incredibly, liberal thinking is even ashamed of Western distrust of "conservative" Islamic political organizations (like Hamas) and governments (e.g. Iran), in spite of the fact that those groups' attitudes on points like women's issues, homosexuality, and free speech (to name just a few) could not be more disgusting to the liberal mind.

Now let me be clear: as a conservative American, I do not believe that our country has done right by all of the groups mentioned above. There are plenty of shameful decisions, policies and incidents in our past and present. However, I believe in my country, and I love it in spite of it's flaws. I believe that we should work to change those things that are wrong, but I also believe that we should celebrate the great good that is also part of our heritage.

So I'll say it this way: I'm proud to be an American, and that is regardless of whether my candidate is winning or not.

Electric Car, by Teenager

My last post was about the bazillion-dollar efforts of a multinational corporation to build a new kind of hydrogen-electric car; this one is about a sixteen-year-old who built a plug-in electric pickup using 20 regular car batteries, an '88 Mazda, and $6K from his part-time job.

Taken together, I think that this is just another thing that's great about America. You've got a backyard do-gooder kid contributing to this effort (to create cleaner cars) because he believes it's the right thing to do, and a giant company doing the same thing--not because some government bureaucrat came up with an appropriate incentive to induce them to do so, but because it will be good for their bottom line. That's the kind of green innovation I like to see.

(thanks for the link goes to Carlos, the Official Brother-in-Law of the Brink)

Soviets Politics in America

Finally, in the last of three random posts in a row: A former Soviet spy says exactly what's been on my mind, but better than I ever could.

Here are some quotes:

Sowing the seeds of anti-Americanism by discrediting the American president was one of the main tasks of the Soviet-bloc intelligence community during the years I worked at its top levels. This same strategy is at work today, but it is regarded as bad manners to point out the Soviet parallels. For communists, only the leader counted, no matter the country, friend or foe. At home, they deified their own ruler--as to a certain extent still holds true in Russia. Abroad, they asserted that a fish starts smelling from the head, and they did everything in their power to make the head of the Free World stink...

Competition is indeed the engine that has driven the American dream forward, but unity in time of war has made America the leader of the world. During World War II, 405,399 Americans died to defeat Nazism, but their country of immigrants remained sturdily united. The U.S. held national elections during the war, but those running for office entertained no thought of damaging America's international prestige in their quest for personal victory. Republican challenger Thomas Dewey declined to criticize President Roosevelt's war policy. At the end of that war, a united America rebuilt its vanquished enemies. It took seven years to turn Nazi Germany and imperial Japan into democracies, but that effort generated an unprecedented technological explosion and 50 years of unmatched prosperity for us all.

Great article. Here's a bonus quote on Soviet propaganda on the Vietnam War:

During the Vietnam War we spread vitriolic stories around the world, pretending that America's presidents sent Genghis Khan-style barbarian soldiers to Vietnam who raped at random, taped electrical wires to human genitals, cut off limbs, blew up bodies and razed entire villages. Those weren't facts. They were our tales, but some seven million Americans ended up being convinced their own president, not communism, was the enemy. As Yuri Andropov, who conceived this dezinformatsiya war against the U.S., used to tell me, people are more willing to believe smut than holiness.

Here's a question: how much of the news we hear today is actually propaganda..? And a followup: how can you know for sure? Hmm.

"Governor, you had me at Roadkill"

It seems that "Late Late Show" host Craig Ferguson has applied for honorary citizenship to the state of Texas. Governor Perry responded and Ferguson reads the letter, which is humorous, self-deprecating, politically incorrect, and probably destined for the same kind of across-Texas appeal as George W.'s "In Texas, we call it walking" quote. Check it out...

The End of War

I ran across this article this week by a guy named Tony Long about the nature of war given the brutal effectiveness of today's weapons. After quoting Churchill about the squalor of modern war and noting that there's no going back to ancient times with less powerful weaponry, the author gives us the only solution: eliminate war itself:

...going forward there is only one solution. War itself must be made obsolete and that means eliminating the reasons men wage war: nationalism, religion, greed. But it will never happen, not in my lifetime or in yours, because that means 1.) abandoning the concept of the nation-state 2.) abolishing all religion 3.) replacing stock-market, corporate capitalism with universal socialism. It requires nothing less than a reinvention of the human condition. Imagine.

This is a line of thought that is simply amazing to me. This guy actually believes that the solution to man's geopolitical problems is an empire that destroys/absorbs all nation-states, abolished all religions, and brings socialism to all. Oh wait, we've already seen that--it was called the Soviet Union! I'll go out on a limb and say that veterans of that 70-year experiment wouldn't describe it as any kind of nirvana. Of course war is a terrible thing, but even the horrific toll Nazi Germany exacted on the USSR in World War II pales in comparison to the millions of lives taken in internal purges of its own people by various Soviet leaders.

I guess I can't expect anything different; this is the same deep thinker who inspired a post on this blog last year with his article about how the solution to the problems with the press is have the government license and pay all media outlets.

Ah, socialism. It works so well until you actually see it in action.

Treating You Dead or Alive

It seems that a publicly-funded hospital in Ireland certified a disabled man in his 30s as dead, but when the morticians arrived to pick up his body he was still occupying it, apparently awake and alert. The hospital suffers from chronic overcrowding and recently from nurse strikes which seek more pay for less hours. But, never fear--a committee has been formed to investigate which will probably fix everything.

If you are think that the US needs to provide health care for all, this is yet another example of the horrors of free medical care. And if you're upset about rich Americans getting better care than than the poor, consider this: do you think that wealthy Irish patients go to this hospital which is accidentally not killing people? I'll bet there are more expensive places you can be treated, and if not you can fly to another country if you've got that kind of money. The US system definitely needs work, but sending it down this path is the wrong idea.

I Scratch My Head in Salute

The link above features a letter to the editor from Arkansas that attacks Congress for exacerbating global warming by starting Daylight Savings Time early, thus adding an hour of daylight for an extra month. It kind of makes sense if you take it at face value as the worst attack EVER on global-warming theorists. Maybe the author thinks that Miss America is actually bringing us world peace, as well. However, perhaps it is sarcastically attacking conservative global-warming-doubters by making light of their alleged position and simultaneously labeling them as loose-screw right-wing conspiracy theorists.

Maybe I'm just tired, but the more I try to think about what the author was actually thinking the closer my head gets to actually exploding. I have decided that this may be the most confusing three paragraphs ever written by someone other than a lawyer, poet, or addict.

Plus, there's a typo by the editor in the headline.

Enjoy!

Racism and Hypocrisy by Reverends

In the light of Don Imus' racist "jokes" and subsequent firing, racism is on the front pages again. Not coincidentally, America's racial reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are on the front pages again.

The blog post above (here or click on the title bar) brings up some history on Sharpton and Jackson that you might not know, including their documented antisemitism. That's right, both alleged purveyors of racial harmony have some special nicknames for Jewish people, and Sharpton in particular seems to have incited antisemitic riots that have led to the deaths of eight innocent people. Another quote from the entry has interesting echoes of the recent Duke lacrosse scandal (in which Sharpton also had plenty to say):

The good “reverend” Al Sharpton has a history of using racial attacks to further his cause. As noted in the 2003 column by Jeff Jacoby, in 1987 Sharpton spread a hoax that a 15-year-old black girl was “abducted, raped, and smeared with feces by a group of white men.” Sharpton singled out one particular white man, saying, “If we’re lying, sue us, so we can . . . prove you did it.” The man does sue and wins $345,000.

Hopefully you weren't taking either of these guys too seriously before--when you start fathering illegitimate children (as Jackson has) nobody should call you "Reverend"--but this puts their self-serving racial ambulance-chasing in a new light.

If you think I'm being too harsh, check out this dead-on column by Jason Whitlock. Whitlock is a black sports columnist whose take on racial issues I don't always appreciate, but he provides some much-needed perspective on the damage Imus did versus the ongoing work of gangsta rappers. He says this:

Rather than confront this heinous enemy [hip hop that has been perverted, corrupted and overtaken by prison culture] from within, we sit back and wait for someone like Imus to have a slip of the tongue and make the mistake of repeating the things we say about ourselves.

Let me say that I join everyone on the planet in condemning Imus' comments. I think misogyny and mocking of a person's natural physical traits (whether or not those traits are shared by an entire racial group) are asinine and symptomatic of a tiny mind. However, I completely agree with Whitlock that Imus' comments aren't even in the neighborhood of the worst commentary of that type today. As Whitlock says:

I don’t listen or watch Imus’ show regularly. Has he at any point glorified selling crack cocaine to black women? Has he celebrated black men shooting each other randomly? Has he suggested in any way that it’s cool to be a baby-daddy rather than a husband and a parent? Does he tell his listeners that they’re suckers for pursuing education and that they’re selling out their race if they do?

When Imus does any of that, call me and I’ll get upset.

Al Sharpton has been all over Imus, but if he really cares about the problems facing black people today he should mount a campaign against the poison infecting todays hop-hop culture.

Hitler, Time's Man of the Year

I had a discussion yesterday with Friend of the Brink Travis, who informed me that Adolf Hitler was Time magazine's Man of the Year before World War II. I was incredulous, so I had to track it down, and it seems that Adolf was the Man in 1938.

However, it seems that the Man of the Year was given in respect of Hitler's ascension to power and subsequent importance in Europe, but certainly not as glowing praise. Hitler was viewed with deep suspicion and was viewed as a monster on the rise. Time devoted most of the article to a recap of recent events in Germany and on the world stage, and closed with this ominous and prescient quote:

To those who watched the closing events of the year it seemed more than probable that the Man of 1938 may make 1939 a year to be remembered.

click the headline above to read the Time cover story...