NPR NUTTINESS BUT.....

I’ve been watching the world go by for the past week, and a recurring theme has been the nuttiness at NPR that has resulted in the firing of Juan Williams for remarks deemed insensitive to Moslems. Juan Williams is hardly a right-winger, and is generally perceived to be a fair-minded commentator. I found this whole situation to be hysterical, particularly in terms of what is says about how NPR pretentiously perceives itself. So Juan Williams has a gig at Fox News, and um, NPR. How that ought to come down and did is a no-brainer, even though many affiliate stations were very unhappy about this.

Notwithstanding that I am about as friendly to NPR as anyone can be, largely because the stations are just about the only source available for classical music and programs like Music from the Hearts of Space. I even go to fundraisers for my local station, although I could certainly live without the rest of NPR. But even then I recall one time hearing an interview with Jacques Barzun discussing his epic masterpiece on Western civilization (From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life 1500 to the Present). I don’t know where else that kind of thing can be found. To me it is more disconcerting that intellectually stimulating material falls into such a narrow band and gets mixed up with “progressivism.” Overall, as far as content goes, NPR does cover things that no one else does, and does a reasonably good job of it. It is only the political slant that sometimes enters that diminishes it, as with the firing of Juan Williams. Lurking behind all of this may be the influence of the evil currency speculator George Soros, who recently gave a large donation to NPR.

However, leaving ideology aside, I don’t believe that taxpayers should have to fund this network. I find some value in it so I provide support. I don’t expect that everyone else should have to. It really isn’t a function of government. Meanwhile the only result of this is that Juan Williams will go on to bigger and better things.

RACE TO THE BOTTOM

The federal reserve apparently believes there is not enough inflation and they would like to get it above 2% to 3% or 4%. This would be done by printing money and buying government bonds. The administration’s economists want a weaker dollar to encourage exports. Of course other countries feel the same way andwant their currencies to depreciate for the same reason, and all want the Chinese yuan to rise, presumably to slow down their export machine. But it is the height of irresponsibility for the country with the world’s reserve currency to manipulate its currency rather providing a predictable and stable store of value. Furthermore all this does is make all of us poorer. It is obvious that if you have something of value, if it is worth less it is in fact worth less. That means the dollars you have buy less.

We are seeing commodity prices escalating upward as a result, for everything from the corn and soybeans that are vital to the food chain, to oil, to gold. This means higher gas prices, as well as higher food prices. That certainly looks like inflation that people can ill afford. Seared in my memory is the misery of the Carter years with double-digit inflation worthy of a banana republic, with instability and sky high interest rates. That won’t exactly prop up the housing market. Runaway inflation is inevitable down the road unless we stop printing money, slash government spending and begin reducing debt instead of increasing it. To get economic growth to resume we need to assure a stable business climate, reduce regulations and red tape, and cut taxes to encourage new investment, which is the only way to create jobs. What we have now is a climate of uncertainty to the point where, incredibly, we don’t know what our taxes are going to be next year due to an irresponsible congress that has failed to pass any legislation.

It is ridiculous to blame the Chinese for this, when it is all of our own doing. Consider our deal with China. They sell us really cheap stuff, which goes into the hands of people who could otherwise not afford it. What do they get from us? A lot of paper debt that is worth less each day. If Chinese goods cost more the people most hurt are those with the least amount of resources. Much of these goods are the products of American companies. For example, Apple designs everything here but builds it in China. Trade is a net plus for this country in terms of job creation, and clearly in terms of prices. We have a trade deficit because Americans save too little and spend too much. But rather than encouraging savings the government is penalizing the thrifty with miserably low returns on savings accounts due to the easy money policy.

We need a strong and stable dollar to assure that we remain the world’s foremost economic power. Instead of racing for the bottom we should be reaching for the top. None of these inflationary policies and wasteful government spending are going to create jobs. The only way that that will happen is with a positive business environment and taxation that encourages, rather than discourages investment. Unless current policies are changed we will continue to be victims of a no-growth environment.

RACE TO THE BOTTOM

The federal reserve apparently believes there is not enough inflation and they would like to get it above 2% to 3% or 4%. This would be done by printing money and buying government bonds. The administration's economists want a weaker dollar to encourage exports. Of course other countries feel the same way andwant their currencies to depreciate for the same reason, and all want the Chinese yuan to rise, presumably to slow down their export machine. But it is the height of irresponsibility for the country with the world's reserve currency to manipulate its currency rather providing a predictable and stable store of
value. Furthermore all this does is make all of us poorer. It is obvious that if you have something of value, if it is worth less it is in fact worth less. That
means the dollars you have buy less.

We are seeing commodity prices escalating upward as a result, for everything
from the corn and soybeans that are vital to the food chain, to oil, to gold.
This means higher gas prices, as well as higher food prices. That certainly
looks like inflation that people can ill afford. Seared in my memory is the
misery of the Carter years with double-digit inflation worthy of a banana
republic, with instability and sky high interest rates. That won't exactly prop
up the housing market. Runaway inflation is inevitable down the road unless we
stop printing money, slash government spending and begin reducing debt instead
of increasing it. To get economic growth to resume we need to assure a stable
business climate, reduce regulations and red tape, and cut taxes to encourage
new investment, which is the only way to create jobs. What we have now is a
climate of uncertainty to the point where, incredibly, we don't know what our
taxes are going to be next year due to an irresponsible congress that has failed
to pass any legislation.

It is ridiculous to blame the Chinese for this, when it is all of our own doing.
Consider our deal with China. They sell us really cheap stuff, which goes into
the hands of people who could otherwise not afford it. What do they get from us?
A lot of paper debt that is worth less each day. If Chinese goods cost more the
people most hurt are those with the least amount of resources. Much of these
goods are the products of American companies. For example, Apple designs
everything here but builds it in China. Trade is a net plus for this country in
terms of job creation, and clearly in terms of prices. We have a trade deficit
because Americans save too little and spend too much. But rather than
encouraging savings the government is penalizing the thrifty with miserably low
returns on savings accounts due to the easy money policy.

We need a strong and stable dollar to assure that we remain the world's foremost
economic power. Instead of racing for the bottom we should be reaching for the
top. None of these inflationary policies and wasteful government spending are
going to create jobs. The only way that that will happen is with a positive
business environment and taxation that encourages, rather than discourages
investment. Unless current policies are changed we will continue to be victims
of a no-growth environment.

THE CAPITAL STRIKE

There are literally trillions of dollars sitting on the sidelines in corporate treasuries and private accounts because of continuing uncertainty about taxes and the economy. The congress adjourned without passing any tax legislation in lieu of the expiring Bush tax cuts, leaving everything up in the air. As a result new investment in the U.S. is suffering. New investment is the only way jobs are created and without it the economy is going to continue to stumble along with little growth and unemployment near 10%. As a result the U.S. has actually fallen behind Brazil, China, and India as the best place to invest.

This is a “no confidence” vote on the part of people in a position to invest in the current government if ever there was one as a result of its anti-business policies. I have no great love for the wealthy. A majority of them voted for Obama, and in one sense should get what they deserve in terms of taxes. Unfortunately there is no way to tax the liberals without hurting everyone else. I also don’t understand their obsession with money above everything else in life, because you can’t take it with you. However, in simple terms it is a question of who gets control of the money. The left views money as something that is theirs to redistribute rather than the property of its owners, but then the left has never understood economics. The issue is simply who gets to allocate the money- those who own it, or the government. As Margaret Thatcher once said, “the trouble with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”

Those who possess wealth can do one of three things with it- spend it, invest it, or keep it on the sidelines or in some nonproductive asset like gold. Suppose they spend it on luxuries like yachts. Some might disapprove of conspicuous consumption but the reality is that someone has to build that yacht and workers get paid for doing so. Someone has to supply the company building the yacht, which helps small business. Spending money then is actually a transfer to other people directly or indirectly. If instead they invest it, they take some risk for reward, but in the process create jobs, new business, and economic growth.

The alternative is for the government to tax and spend it through punitive taxes. But the government is notoriously inefficient and incompetent at most things it attempts to do. It is the grand conceit of the elites of the left that they somehow “know better” than other people how to run things, and therefore should be given control of their resources in order to achieve “social justice.” As we are seeing now, what they don’t achieve is economic growth and full employment. We have a clear example of this ideology in the government’s “stimulus,” which has stimulated nothing but more government.

Unless people know that there is a stable, predictable environment friendly to business they will sit on their hands, as it doesn’t pay to invest or even to work that hard if the government is going to tax away most of what they earn. The United States always had a reputation for being a free, stable, and welcoming environment providing opportunity for anyone willing to work, save and invest. That has been seriously damaged by this administration, and as long is its policies persist there will be continued high unemployment and low growth as the capital strike continues.

WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO LIBERAL PATRIOTISM?

A left-wing professor in Illinois objected to a crowd shouting “USA” at a football game because it might “offend Muslims.” In this case the Muslims are getting a bad rap from this leftist dog as being unpatriotic. But it brings up a larger question. There was a time when at least every one could agree on flag and country. Now there are people who actually object to our national symbols as offensive. Thus the people being “offended” are not Muslims but liberals.

One would have thought that the election of Obama would have brought some resurgence in patriotism on the left, but on contrary, internationalism rules the day from White house on down. This is a pretty sad state of affairs and was not always the case. Once there was “Yankee Doodle Dandy” and Roosevelt during World War II. This shared patriotism continued at least through the Presidency of John F. Kennedy, but then the left went over the cliff in the 60s and now actually opposes patriotic display and expressions.

In this respect it is no surprise that most of the armed forces and casualties are from “red” states, or more precisely “red” counties. By the way how did the right become “red,” a color that was always associated with the left and communism? I remember when it was “better to be dead than red.” I think it was actually based on the colors chosen for the election board on NBC or one of the network news programs. We apparently are stuck with it now. In any case it is clear there are people on the left who are filled with loathing for Americans and our way of life, particularly in universities, where tenured radicals rule. I wish they’d leave the country.

POLITICAL PASSION

Nutty ex-President Jimmy Carter, has pronounced that the country is more divided today than at any time since the Civil War. This is factually incorrect. There were over 600,000 dead in the Civil War. Where are the casualties in the “culture war?” Furthermore, anyone who was around in the late 60s/early 70s knows that the country was far more divided then than it is today. Indeed the same people on both sides are still around, and yes, still divided. The difference today is that there is alternative media. Back then, the news was owned by the three liberal networks and the NY Times, and the whole narrative was told from a left-wing perspective. Thus they wrote of i.e. the “youth,” the “women” etc. as if all had the same viewpoint, never acknowledging that there were plenty of us on the right. The effect of this myopic monopoly back then was to alienate the public and increase support for the right, leaving the elites in shock when it turned out there were far more conservatives than they could have imagined.

While what is happening today is similar from the elite standpoint, it is nowhere near as intense as four decades ago. The news monopoly has been broken, and even as the establishment controls a shrinking piece of the pie, there are media alternatives today that lean right. Political differences at the ideological level are fundamentally a clash of values. There is no lower common denominator and that is why we have politics- to settle these divisions in a civil manner. Values in and of themselves are not rationally derived, but stem from family, custom, and belief. The establishment media and academia have continuously portrayed the values of the right as “irrational,” never realizing that their own fundamental values also have no rational basis.

After decades of ideology I have come to realize that it can lead to a type of tunnel vision. That is to say that politics dominates all discourse and judgment and is the prism through which the world is viewed. It involves focusing on one topic- politics, with religious fervor, to the exclusion of everything else. This sort of behavior is actually far more characteristic of the left than the right, because they are the ones who politicize everything and attempt to bring all aspects of life into the public sphere. The right reacts when is basic values are challenged, but it is the left that has made every aspect of life political. The right recognizes a far larger private sphere that ought not to be political, whereas the left wants to subject everything to public policy. This sort of fanaticism results in failing to see the interwoven complexity of things and how millions upon millions of individual decisions are the crux of real life. Ironically it is the “liberals” who are most intolerant. They look at everything in political terms, so that in coming upon something new the first question they ask is where this thing or person stands politically, even though it may be totally apolitical to everyone else. They cannot escape the ideological lens, so that ironically the “progressives,” as they now call themselves, are the most illiberal people on the planet. Conservatives are the true liberals, and indeed in virtually every other place in the world what Americans call conservatism is considered “liberalism.” Milton Friedman spent his life trying to rescue that term but never succeeded. Perhaps it is time to explore the true meaning of liberalism.

Meanwhile the “progressive” establishment media continues to portray the Tea Party as a kind of lunatic fringe that is irrational, extreme, etc. In fact given its focus on government spending, excess, and debt, which are undeniable facts, the Tea Party is actually tone of the most rational movements to ever come along.

THE TWO 9/11s

I will never forget the reaction of people in New York on September 11, 2001. Most broke into spontaneous chants of patriotic songs or chants of USA, but in Union Square the people started singing “Imagine.” That more than anything symbolized to me the divide between left and right in this country, or more accurately between the left and the rest of the country. Not surprisingly we see the same division on the location of a mosque at ground zero, nine years later.

For the left, the United States is a deeply flawed society responsible for most of the evil in the world. That hard core amounts to those not part of the 88% that approved of George Bush after 9/11 in a moment of national unity and resolve. Yet improbably, nine years later “Imagine” made its way to the White House and contributes to the current unpopularity and mistrust of this administration.

No matter how much we might wish to stand down, there will always be evil in the world, sometimes controlling governments, sometimes revolting violently against them, but with a constant disregard for human life and joy in mass murder. We did not “bring this on ourselves;” it came to us. There are only two choices- surrender or fight. There is no middle way with this enemy. No matter how painful it is to revisit, we must keep alive the horrible images of innocent bodies jumping from the burning towers to remember what we are up against, even as we finally begin the process of rebuilding the WTC site.

Hollywood has noticeably been AWOL on this, and if anything has produced anti-American propaganda. The old patriots who once controlled the studios and built the industry are long gone. There was one production that was truly excellent in laying out the facts. It was “The Path to 9/11” which aired on ABC. However they have refuse to rerelease it or produce it on video to avoid offending the Clintons, even though the show did not particularly blame them outside of laxity in government agencies.. It was an objective and sobering account. Everyone should call on ABC to release this production in its original format

FAREWELL TO MEN

A recent survey indicated that women 22-34 now out earn men in their age group. This is largely a result of being better educated, as women now outnumber men in college. The social implications of this are profound and do not bode well for women as well as men. If women are better educated and earning more than their male peers, the prospects for finding a suitable mate are significantly reduced. The pool of marriageable men simply isn’t large enough. This also results in an increase in dysfunctional males avoiding, or unable to assume responsibility, and is a contributing factor in the rise in illegitimate births. The problem is less acute for affluent, college-educated couples who will go on to traditional social arrangements. But it also leaves an increasing underclass of fatherless children, who in turn will likely father and abandon children of their own.

This is exacerbated by the liberals war on traditional males. Nowadays in movies and tv shows we routinely see women kicking male butts, which is pure fantasy. It is a product of sissified Hollywood. Long gone are men like Clark Gable and Gary Cooper, never mind John Wayne. They have been replaced by boys or fools that never grow up. Where are the positive role models for young men? This is not simply a male complaint, for I cannot believe that women want these types for partners.

As the male role continues to be diminished we inevitably run up against the natural world, with destructive consequences. These conditions are only possible in civilized societies with the rule of law, but they are but a moment in the history of our species. Such a sudden shift is bound to have a profound effect on the psyche by upending all that has been built into us over countless thousands of years. I am not arguing for any government solution to a problem it has contributed to, but a cultural shift back to understanding what it means to be a man.

NO MOSQUE AT THE WTC!

I belonged to and was married in a small church in the shadow of the World Trade Center. St. Nicholas had been a former tavern and was rectangular in shape, made a perfect form fill between the two WTC towers. If there were fifty people in it, it was crowded, but it was a charming little space in the midst of great towers. That church was destroyed on September 11 along with the World Trade Center.

To me the building of a mosque on this hallowed ground is doubly offensive and I think we must be prepared to prevent it by whatever means necessary. It is a desecration and offense to the memory of all those who died that day as well as all those who continue to die in the fight against radical Islam. It belongs there about as much as a cathedral in Mecca.

Yes despite overwhelming public opposition the political class is supporting this abomination in the name of religious freedom. Mayor Bloomberg, Governor-in-waiting Andrew Cuomo, and President Obama have all expressed support for this project, and deserve to be turned out of office on this basis alone. For implicit in their position is a contempt for public opinion similar to the attitude taken by elites towards the tea party protests. They “know better” than the ignorant mass of people who have been led astray by right-wing cheerleaders to upend the “proper” world view. This is how things work in Europe, where elites govern as they see fit, largely ignoring the public will. For example the public in many countries supports capital punishment, but the ruling class opposes it so it is banned.

There are even some “conservatives” who share this elitist world view, i.e. when it comes to someone like Sarah Palin. But never has the gap been wider between the government and the people on a whole range of issues. These rascals deserve to be voted out in November producing a clear message.

I would argue further that the mosque supporters, who generally are the same people quick to ban Christian symbols from the public square, show the need for a constitutional amendment. This amendment would explicitly recognize the Christian foundation of this nation. I advocate this even though I am personally agnostic, because it is an undeniable part of our heritage. In the past it was not necessary to state the obvious, but as liberals have chiseled away at our traditional foundations, largely through the courts, it has become necessary to restate the basic tenets of America.

THE PEOPLE VS. THE COURTS

Yesterday’s ruling by federal district judge in California overturning Proposition 8, which denied gay marriage rights is a travesty beyond measure. This basically denies the fact that society has the authority to define marriage, rendering it meaningless. You can be sure the nutty 9th Circuit Court of Appeals covering the area will rule along similar lines, and the Supreme Court is uncertain as it may decide to grab the power to decide this itself. Leaving aside the issue of gay marriage itself, what we have here is a judge overruling a sovereign vote of the people. This passed as a public referendum in California. No court should have the authority to overrule a referendum.

What will follow soon is a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman whatever the courts do, but this is a tedious process. We also need a constitutional amendment banning judges from overruling the results of a referendum period. No individual or court should possess such authority, and the judiciary has no right to grab it for itself.