Tuesday, 06 November 2007
MEDIA BIAS AND THE NEWARK STAR-FUDGER...ER, LEDGER
Earlier this afternoon I went to have my car serviced. There was a
newspaper for customers in the waiting room. This being New Jersey, it
happened to be the Newark Star-Ledger.
On the first page of the "New Jersey" section I was drawn to an article which
talked about how much turnover there was about to be in the state
legislature. The second paragraph started "Retirements and resignations,
several of which were prompted by criminal investigations, are about to produce
the largest turnover in decades". That is the one and only reference to
criminality in the article.
I admit that I automatically began
to assume that all or most of the criminal investigations were among
Democrats. Why? Because if they were Republicans, the Star-Ledger would surely
have said so.
But, I reasoned, "Be fair, you don't know that for a fact" and fought
off my urge to make such an assumption.
However, I then turned to the jump page and found a chart of who
retired for what reason. The chart taught me that, sometimes when you
assume, you DON'T make an ass of u and me.
There are 30 state senators and assembly members retiring. Of them, 17 are Democrats and 13
are Republicans. A total of 5 among these 30 retirees are resigning either under
indictment (2), because of being the target of a federal
investigation (1) or because of being arrested for extortion (2).
With a 17-13 majority of Democratic retirees, this would
proportionately work out to 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans. But
that wasn't the way of things.
In fact, all 5 were Democrats. No Republicans at all.
So now I'm thinking to myself, "Hey, the article said there were
several retiring due to investigations. But 5 out of 30 is more
than several. And the article made no mention of the party affiliation of
these alleged miscreants, despite the fact that every one, without
exception, was a Democrat".
And then? Then I felt completely
comfortable. I was in New Jersey and this was the Newark
Star-Ledger. The story was being reported just as I would expect them
to report it. Everything was in perfect harmony.
New Jersey and media bias? Perfect together.
WHEN OHIO VOTE-RIGGING ISN'T NEWS
Remember when the Democratic propaganda apparatus was assuring us
that John Kerry really won the presidential election of 2004, and that Ohio's
vote count was rigged? keith olbermann alone spent months reciting his mantra on this
"story" virtually every day.
Maybe you don't remember that they conducted a recount, and the
result was that John Kerry gained a total of 17 votes while George Bush lost
6. That is a turnaround of 23 in a state that Bush won by over 118,000
votes. Not what you'd call first page news.
But let's be fair; the Democratic paranoidosphere did have a point about
attempts to rig the election. They just had the wrong party.
Here is a fun little article from Warner Todd Huston of www.newsbusters.org, which spells out the
2 Convicted for Vote Fraud in
Ohio: No Mention That They're Democrats
We have seen over and over again how the
MSM (and the AP in particular) can't seem to force themselves to mention the
party affiliation of some elected official accused and/or convicted of a crime
if that official happens to be a Democrat. Now the MSM has expanded that from
elected officials even to party workers. The AP reports a story on two Democrat
election officials convicted of recount rigging and neglect of official duties
for their actions during the 2004 elections but, for some hard to determine
reason, few if any news sources are mentioning that these two are
Jacqueline Maiden and Kathleen Dreame have pleaded
guilty to the charges after an aborted conviction from last January, the
original trial having been granted a retrial on grounds not connected with the
Their crime is a bit hard to explain,
but what it come down to is that they committed fraud with the 2004 ballot
recount procedures that amounted to their attempt to get out of following the
proper procedure to conduct the recount.
Most of the news reports take great pains to say
that the convicted operatives' actions "weren't for political purposes," but
even if that were true does that make legitimate not mentioning that they are
Democrat Party election officials in Cuyahoga County, one of Ohio's most
Again, we have to ask, what would these news
sources do if these two guilty officials were Republican election workers? Who
can doubt that the party affiliation would have led the reportage of this
So, no party affiliation for Maiden and Dreame
from either UPI, the AP, or the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
The closest we get is an oblique reference to the
claim that the pair's actions didn't help John Kerry in 2004.
Special prosecutor Kevin Baxter did not claim
the actions affected the outcome of the election. Democratic Sen. John Kerry
Kerry gained 17 votes and President Bush lost six in the county recount.
The fact that Kerry gained 17 votes in the recount
would not have been mentioned had these two not been Democrat Poll workers, the
suspicion being that they fraudulently created Kerry's gain out of thin air. But
surmising this point takes some thought and is not obvious on it's surface. So,
even the recitation of this point does not explain in a straight forward manner
that these two women were Democrats.
No, what we have here is another game of
hide-the-Democrat from the readers. Another in a long list of stories that will
seemingly never end..
I especially enjoy where it says that the two Democratic poll workers, both
convicted of recount rigging, weren't doing it for political purposes.
Sure. And when I was 16 years old and tried to get my hand inside my date's
bra, I wasn't doing it for sexual purposes either.
I have blogged over and over again about media's disinclination to mention
party affiliation when the people guilty of corrupt or illegal actions are
Democrats. But this one is especially galling, given the amount of
coverage media gave to the nonsensical claim that Ohio's vote was rigged
against john kerry.
But listen to them squeal like pigs being poked, if you call them
THE OUTING OF MSNBC
With Chris Mouthews on twice a day - once at 5PM and again at 7PM - and keith
olbermann on at 8PM, MSNBC is second to none in its dedication to the liberal
left. But the network has, until now, at least tried to create the
pretense that it is neutral.
You can almost hear them saying "Look, the hard left in this
country thinks Matthews is a RIGHT winger, don't they?". And within this narrow (and
I do mean narrow) context they have a point. Mouthews is despised
by the daily kos and crooksandliars crowd, because he is anti Bush only 85 - 90% of
the time, not 100%. In their strange and distant world, that makes him a
In the real world, however, Mouthews is anything but. He is a lifelong
Democrat who worked for a number of different Democratic politicians, most notably
as a senior operative for then-Speaker of the House Tip
By contrast, no one challenges olbermann's left wing
credentials, unless there is a maoist somewhere out there who thinks he should be able to find a way to
go left more than 100% of the time.
So what is MSNBC now doing to answer the skepticism that it has devolved into
little other than a doctrinaire left wing venue? Why they've decided to
try and get Rosie O'Donnell into their prime time lineup, that's what.
You think I'm kidding, right? You're saying to yourself "nah, Berwitz
is off the deep end on this one, because if MSNBC adds Rosie O'Donnell to
Mouthews and olbermann, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that anyone
could ever consider the network neutral. And since MSNBC's parent company
is NBC, it would reflect on them as well. This is impossible. I hope
Ken gets back on the wagon and sobers up because he must be on some kind of a
bender to write something that ridiculous"
Oh yeah? Well read this, courtesy of the New York Times:
Rosie ODonnell in Talks to Join
Rosie ODonnell, who
abruptly left The View on ABC last spring after drawing attention and ratings
for her opinions on everything from the Iraq war to her co-hosts, is in serious
discussions to return to television atop a new soapbox: a prime-time show on the
cable news channel MSNBC, according to executives on both sides of the
negotiations who have been briefed directly.
Under one scenario, Ms. ODonnell would be given
the 9 p.m. slot each weeknight on MSNBC, where she would go head-to-head with
two heavyweights of cable talk: Larry King Live on
CNN and Hannity & Colmes on Fox News. Her show would replace Live with
Dan Abrams, a relatively low-rated program that only recently replaced
Scarborough Country, which was also little-watched.
But NBC executives, speaking on condition of
anonymity because the conversations are continuing, cautioned that there were
many elements of a potential deal yet to be resolved. These include when such a
show would appear, what Ms. ODonnell would be paid, and whether she would also
be seen on the NBC broadcast network.
Ms. ODonnell alluded somewhat cryptically to a
possible new job in a speech she gave at a book-signing on Sunday night in
Miami, according to a report that appeared on a website, lyingonthebeach.com. A podcast on
that site described Ms. ODonnell as saying that she would soon begin competing
against the guy with the suspenders and the long, long face, an obvious
reference to Mr. King.
NBC has been courting Ms. ODonnell in recent
months for any number of jobs, including host of a possible new game
NOW who's into liquor cabinet?
Let's see... if Rosie ups with MSNBC, they will have a three hour stretch from 7PM
to 10PM that parodies one of olbermann's daily features. Instead of the
worst, worster and worstest person in the world (a title usually reserved for Mr. olbermann's
real demons, the guys on Fox who make mincemeat of him, Mouthews and Dan
Abrams in the ratings), we'll have the left, lefter and leftest show
hosts. Mouthews, olbermann and - sure to overtake him based on her lunatic
comments regarding terrorists and 9/11 - O'Donnell.
Hey, why stop there? Maybe they can exhume William Kunstler for the
10PM slot. Not only would it finish the leftward continuum through
prime time but, even though he is dead 12 years, Kunstler's corpse would
probably generate more ratings than what they have on
THE DEMOCRATS' ACHILLES HEEL
Here, courtesy of the Washington Times, are the data. Read them and see why, if
the numbers are accurate, Democrats are in trouble on this issue. Big, big trouble.
And that includes Ah-nuld. Even if he did veto the DREAM act.
Put another way, if Governor Schwarzenegger aspires
to the presidency, it will just have to remain a DREAM.
MEDIA'S ACQUIESCENCE TO GEORGE SOROS
The following piece from www.sweetness-light.com is long.
For that I apologize.
It is also fact-filled, eye-opening and and brilliant. For that I do
The folks at sweetness-light take apart the claims about
"waterboarding" as a method of torture that we have all been reading for
weeks, months, even years. It exposes a key source of this
characterization and takes him apart. By so doing, it also takes apart the
media, which swallowed this BS hook. line and sinker, presumably
because it came from a left wing site - one supported and
nurtured by the USA hating convicted inside trader, George Soros.
Here is the piece - with bold print supplied by sweetness-light, not
November 5th, 2007
From Clinton/Soros taxpayer-supported charity
Fox News correspondent on his on-air
waterboarding: a pretty efficient mechanism to get someone to talk and then
still have them alive and healthy within minutes
Summary: Fox News Steve Harrigan underwent what
he described as three phase[s] of the controversial interrogation technique
known as waterboarding, on camera, concluding that the technique is a
pretty efficient mechanism to get someone to talk and then still have them
alive and healthy within minutes.
Psychologists have asserted that
such forms of near-asphyxiation can lead to long-term psychological
This last sentence is touted by Media Matters (and
now other media outlets) as somehow a debunking of the accuracy of Mr.
But leaving aside that Mr. Harrigan can probably
judge whether he has suffered long-term psychological damage, lets look at the
authority Media Matters is citing for their quote.
For while Media Matter twice claims that
psychologists have asserted this technique can cause
long term damage, Dr. Allen S. Keller is the only psychologist they
As Media Matters goes on to report, the relevant
quote is from a nearly three year old article from the New Yorker:
The secret history of Americas extraordinary
by Jane Mayer February 14, 2005
According to the Times, a secret memo
issued by Administration lawyers authorized the C.I.A. to use novel
interrogation methodsincluding water-boarding, in which a suspect
is bound and immersed in water until he nearly drowns.
Dr. Allen Keller, the director of the
Bellevue/N.Y.U. Program for Survivors of Torture, told me that he had treated
a number of people who had been subjected to such forms of near-asphyxiation,
and he argued that it was indeed torture. Some victims were still traumatized
years later, he said. One patient couldnt take showers, and panicked when it
rained. The fear of being killed is a terrifying experience, he
Media Matters again cited Dr.
Keller in an earlier (and very similar)
article about waterboarding only a couple of days ago:
On CNN, West asserted waterboarding is not
torture, claimed, [Y]ou wake up feeling fine the next day
Fri, Nov 2, 2007 4:57pm ET
Summary: On CNN, Washington Times columnist
Diana West said: What I would like to see is people really start thinking
about what is torture. If putting people into human-size shredders, as Saddam
Hussein did, is torture, then waterboarding, which my senior military sources
tell me you wake up feeling fine the next day it is not torture.
However, in congressional testimony, Allen
S. Keller, M.D., director of the Bellevue Hospital Center/New York University
Program for Survivors of Torture, stated, To think that abusive methods,
including the enhanced interrogation techniques [in which Keller included
waterboarding], are harmless psychological ploys is contradictory to well
established medical knowledge and clinical experience. Keller stated
of waterboarding specifically, Long term effects include panic attacks,
depression and PTSD, and said it poses a real risk of
Wait, theres more.
For Media Matters has also cited the good doctor
Dr. Keller as an authority on the dangers and long-term effects of
water-boarding here and here and here and here.
But one has to ask exactly how many of Dr.
Kellers patients have actually been waterboarded?
According to Wikipedia, besides the US in the
war on terror, the Khmer Rouge would appear to be the last practitioners of this
arcane art, circa 1974-1979. (Dr. Keller by his own admission only began to
practice 15 years ago.)
And, lest we forget, we have now been
authoritatively told by the self-same reporters who first exposed this odious
practice (in a report that MM quotes) that only three Al
Qaeda detainees have been waterboarded by
the US during the war on terror.
And one of these three was no less a personage
than Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. And it is probably a safe assumption that the other
two are also still in US custody.
So who else is waterboarding people in this day
and age? And how does Dr. Keller know that these miscreants used the CIAs
In fact, note that the New Yorker article
misrepresents water-boarding as a practice in which a suspect is bound
and immersed in water until he nearly drowns. How come the expert Dr. Keller
did not correct their misunderstanding?
Moreover, has Dr. Keller made these torturers
publicly known? Has he reported his tortured victims to Amnesty International or
any other human rights organizations for redress?
If so, where are the records? Lets see them. If
not, why not? The doctor himself seems to be very shy about producing
For oddly enough the doctor did not produce any
water-boarding victims or even their histories when he testified before the US
Senate back in September. (His opening statement can be found in this pdf
Here what Dr. Keller said about
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Hearing
on U.S. Interrogation Policy and Executive Order 13440
September 25, 2007
Water-boarding or mock drowning, where a
prisoner is bound to an inclined board and water is poured over their face,
inducing a terrifying fear of drowning clearly can result in immediate and
long-term health consequences. As the prisoner gags and chokes, the terror of
imminent death is pervasive, with all of the physiologic and psychological
responses expected, including an intense stress response, manifested by
tachycardia, rapid heart beat and gasping for breath.
There is a real risk of death from actually
drowning or suffering a heart attack or damage to the lungs from inhalation of
water. Long term effects include panic attacks, depression and PTSD. I remind
you of the patient I described earlier who would panic and gasp for breath
whenever it rained even years after his abuse.
Here is how he described that patient four pages
One patient of mine, for example, who was
repeatedly submerged in a vat of water while being interrogated, years later
still felt as if he was gasping for air whenever he showered or went out in
So when testifying before Congress the only
example of long-term psychological damage from water-boarding Dr. Keller could
cite was a man who was afraid to shower or go out into the rain?
And, you will note, its a man who was not even
water-boarded according to Dr. Kellers own definition of the term.
Finally, we come to the question of exactly who is
this Dr. Keller anyway? Well, it turns out that Dr. Keller just happens to be a
Soros Advocacy Fellow.
We will let the Soros flagship, the Open Society
Institute, explain exactly what that
Soros Advocacy Fellowship for Physicians
Between 1999 and 2004, OSI operated the
Soros Advocacy Fellowship for Physicians to support a cadre of physician
advocates with expertise in achieving system or policy social change
at the local, state, and national level.
The program was designed both to
advance advocacy as a core professional value for physicians and to enable
doctors to develop or enhance skills that they could use in advocating for
their patients and communities.
Thirty-two fellows in thirteen
states received fellowships to implement projects in partnership with advocacy
organizations addressing issues such as Medicaid coverage and
enrollment, health care access, pediatric oral health, environmental hazards,
and high quality educational opportunities for young
And and advocate he most certainly is. Indeed,
this is not the first time he has held forth boldly on the subject of torture.
In fact, Dr. Keller was on-hand for the New York
Times when they were addressing their favorite subject, Abu Ghraib.
Again, from the archives of the Soros flagship,
Soros Advocacy Fellow Allen Keller Quoted in
New York Times Article Once Tortured, Now Tormented by
May 15, 2004
Dr. Allen Keller, an alumni of the Soros
Advocacy Fellowship, was quoted in a May 15, 2004 New York Times
article that discussed the impact of the pictures from Abu Ghraib on survivors
of torture in the United States.
The torture survivors profiled in the article
spoke of how the pictures from Iraq vividly transported them back to their own
experiences of abuse. Many of the survivors are also grappling with the United
States governments justification for the techniques used to extract
information at Abu Ghraib.
Note how Dr. Keller also sees long-term
psychological damage upon the victims of Abu Ghraib. Indeed, even on those who
just saw the photos from Abu Ghraib.
This is a theme Dr. Keller espoused early and
often, including in the Autumn 2006 issue of Perspectives In
Biology And Medicine:
Torture in Abu Ghraib
Department of Medicine, New York University
School of Medicine, New York, USA. email@example.com
Iraqi detainees subjected to torture and
mistreatment at Abu Ghraib prison may continue to suffer from significant
physical and psychological consequences of their abuse.
This article reports two cases of Iraqi
individuals allegedly tortured at Abu Ghraib. Detailed forensic evaluations
were conducted approximately one year after their abuse in accordance with
international guidelines. The findings of these evaluations substantiate their
allegations of torture and confirm the profound health consequences of
Furthermore, these cases support assertions that
abuse of prisoners was not limited to being perpetrated by guards, but also
occurred systematically in the context of interrogations. These cases also
raise concerns about inadequate medical care for Iraqi
Kind of sounds familiar, doesnt it? Mr. Soros
cant say he hasnt gotten his moneys worth of advocacy from Dr.
And in case anyone was wondering, here is the
official George Soros position on the confirmation of Mr. Murkasey as US
Attorney General, via his Open Society Institute:
Major Human Rights Organizations Urge Senate to
November 1, 2007
Four major human rights organizations today
called on the Senate to reject the nomination of Judge Michael B. Mukasey to
serve as Attorney General. In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee,
Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights, Human Rights First and the
Open Society Policy Center said that a nominee who cannot say simply and
without hesitation that waterboarding is a form of torture does not deserve to
be Attorney General.
Youll note that each of the groups listed
fronts. (Dr. Keller is also a member of
the Physicans For Human Rights.)
But how odd that Media Matters, a group also
funded by George Soros, neglected to mention Dr. Kellers similar connections to
Mr. Soros and his (and their) obvious conflict of interest.
After all, Media Matters hold themselves out
to be the fact-checkers of the right-wing
Media Matters - Our Mission - Who We
Media Matters for America is a
Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information
center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting
conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America
put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross
section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for
conservative misinformation news or commentary that is not accurate,
reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda every day,
in real time.
Using the website www.mediamatters.org as the
principal vehicle for disseminating research and information, Media Matters
posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports
documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally,
Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the
general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the
resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending
Of course Media Matters is nothing more than a
modern day ministry of propaganda. And quite a shabby one at that.
Worse still, they seek to silence anyone who dares
to challenge their doctrines or their masters. .
Suppose a Richard Mellon Scaife supported rightwing site put out a piece
extolling the value of waterboarding, using the same quality of sourcing that
Media Matters is using here. Do you think media would report it, other
than to attack and debunk it? You know the answer to that and so do I.
But listen to them squeal like stuck pigs if you call them biased.
FAKE HATE CRIMES
Remember that incident, weeks ago, when a noose was placed on a Black
professor's door at Columbia University Teacher's College?
Remember the outrage? The protests? The boiling-over level of
activism it spawned? The instant-activists, like al sharpton getting
maximum TV time over it?
Remember the 56 hours of video tape - six different cameras, that could have
shown who placed the noose there? Remember that Columbia University first
REFUSED to provide police with those tapes, but then did
so (pardon my cynicism) after holding them long enough to look
them over and do what they wanted with them?
Well, what happened to those tapes and why has this story been summarily
buried? Given what they were looking for, 56 hours of tape could
have been gone through in less than one day***
While we are waiting (and waiting and waiting and waiting) for news
about this supposed hate crime, please read the following piece, from www.littlegreenfootballs.com, and
think about what it could mean to the Columbia incident:.
Tue, Nov 6, 2007 at 8:14:30 am
The case of those mysterious swastikas that have
been appearing at George Washington University has been revealed as another
phony hate crime: George Washington University Student Who Complained of
Swastikas Admits Drawing Them.
WASHINGTON Officials at George Washington
University say a student who complained of swastikas being drawn on a dorm
room door has admitted responsibility for them.
University spokeswoman Tracy Schario says campus
police found out what happened at Mitchell Hall by using a hidden camera. The
student admitted responsibility today.
Another student was arrested over the weekend
and charged with drawing the Nazi symbols and racial slurs on the doors of
different dorm rooms at New Hall. That suspect has been barred from
Both students will go through GWs judicial
system to determine whether any D.C. or federal laws were violated. The
university is not disclosing name of either student. .
Sad to say, there have been many cases like this in recent years; cases
in which a student or faculty member has intentionally created a phony hate
crime to stir racial tensions, get personal attention or for some other
Is that what happened at Columbia? Is that why the school held the
video tapes long enough to look through them? Is this a hoax?
I don't know the answers to those questions. But every day that goes by
leads me to think the answers just may be "Yes", "Yes" and "Yes".
***Since all they are looking for is when the noose was placed on the
door, those 56 hours can easily be abbreviated.
One way is to run each tape at fast speed and stop the tape when they see the
noose appear. Another is to fast-forward halfway through the tape and
note whether the noose is there. If it is, go back. If it isn't,
fast forward some more and repeat until you find it.
SELECTED LIBERAL DISASTERS
As you can see below, the title is not mine, it is part of the title used by
Jeffrey Lord of www.americanspectator.com, to enumerate
some of the awful positions taken by liberals in this country over the years
and their equally awful consequences.
There is a logical rebuttal to this - i.e. what about the conservative
disasters (and they certainly exist)? My answer to it is that, yes, they
do exist, but we read about those disasters in the media every
day. When do we read about the liberal ones? How often are liberal
disasters talked about?
Well, in this blog the incidence is 100%. Here they are, courtesy of
|A History of
|By Jeffrey Lord
12:07:43 AM |
It's a long list.
Hillary Clinton's endorsement of driver's licenses for illegal
immigrants ("it makes sense") to a very long list.
list? A seemingly unending series of bad policy proposals and
loopy values that liberals have championed during the course
of decades. What all of these subjects have in common is that
they upended common sense in favor of a fit of moral
superiority and emotional feel-goodism. They are a history of
liberal disasters. All backfired or were proved dead wrong.
Sometimes they were outright lethal. Collectively they are
part and parcel of the real reason the once honorable term
"liberal" has won such disdain from so many Americans when it
isn't being hooted out of a serious policy discussion with
laughter. And lying just under the surface of all the current
crop of polls that predict a Democrat victory in the race for
the White House is the lurking reality that any candidate who
makes a point of flying the liberal flag stands a serious
chance of being defeated outright. Why, after all, do you
think Senator Clinton hemmed and hawed her way through the
driver's license issue in last week's debate?
just a handful of my personal favorites:
The idea: to raise the education level of
blacks by forcibly integrating urban schools with white kids
who lived in "segregated" neighborhoods. The result? Disaster.
School enrollment in Boston plummeted, the percentage of
whites dropping from 65% to 28%. In one urban area after
another across the country where forced busing was instituted
amidst angry turmoil "white flight" to the suburbs took off,
igniting a surge of what liberals now moan as "suburban
sprawl." And education? A study by the National Institute of
Education could not find a single study that showed black kids
were better off as a result. Prominent liberal advocates, of
course, sent their own kids to private schools. Slowly,
painfully, most busing programs wound to a stop. But the
damage -- to the kids, to the neighborhoods and to the cities
-- was done
The idea: The Aid to
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was established in
1935 with the objective to provide welfare relief for needy
families and their children. The result? It wound up promoting
baby bearing-for-benefits scams, smothered incentive to work,
destroyed marriages and created what came to be called a
"culture of dependency" that helped devastate the family
structure, particularly in the black community. The election
of a Republican Congress in 1994 forced the issue to the
front, with Speaker Newt Gingrich making it point three of the
ten-item Contract with America. Conservatives insisted on a
five year lifetime limit to be on the welfare rolls, and a
system that led from welfare to work. Only after vetoing the
resulting bill twice, as his presidential re-election campaign
loomed, did President Clinton sign the conservative reforms.
The consequences were dramatic. Welfare rolls plummeted by
57%, costs fell significantly, the work requirement was a
success and child poverty rates for African-American families
dropped sharply. But again, the damage done before reform was
* Luxury Tax
The idea: Pushed
by liberals in a 1990 tax bill, the idea was to tax big-ticket
luxury items and increase government revenue. The result?
Buyers of luxuries such as yachts, jewelry, furs and cars
stopped buying them in the United States. Among others,
American carpenters, electricians, fiberglass and metal
workers lost their jobs. Boat building businesses went
bankrupt. And the revenue? A projected gain of five million in
taxes resulted in an actual loss of $24 million. The luxury
tax was finally repealed, but not soon enough to undue the
damage to hundreds of thousands who lost their jobs or
* Alternative Minimum Tax
idea: Enacted in 1969, the AMT was to disallow deductions and
exemptions in computing tax liability. Why? There were 155 --
155! -- "rich" households who were deemed by liberals to have
too many tax breaks, thus meaning they paid little or no
income tax. The AMT would supposedly cure this. The result?
The Congressional Budget Office now says that 34% of taxpayers
earning between $50,000 and $100,000 will have to pay the tax
-- which is another way of saying that liberals believe if you
earn $50,000 you are rich. That 155 taxpayers has now expanded
to 11% of all taxpayers. The CBO also says that if this is not
changed by 2010, nearly every married taxpayer earning between
$100,000 and $500,000 will be forced to pay the AMT.
Predictably, after all the unintended consequences have kicked
in once again, liberals in Congress are now frantically
calling for repeal to avoid the wrath of their
* Bringing Peace to Vietnam and
The idea: Withdrawing from Southeast Asia
completely in 1975 would bring "peace" to the people of
Vietnam and Cambodia. The result? A tsunami of murder,
concentration camps and desperate "boat people" engulfed the
area, not only not bringing peace to the region but resulting
in what is now recorded as "the killing fields." The subject
usually brings forth a deafening if not embarrassed silence
from liberals when they are not busy, in face of massive
evidence to the contrary, in denying the result of their idea
* Free Love
The idea: If it feels
good, went this old idea that was dusted off at the end of the
1960's do it. Promiscuity? No problem. Result? The AIDS
epidemic, a stunning rise in sexually transmitted diseases.
The idea: Turn on and drop out.
Glamorized by the media, hey man, this was supposed to be
great stuff! Let's party! The result: when the party was over
for all those cool white kids from the sixties America woke up
to a generation of drug addicts who had either died of
overdoses or gotten hooked for a lifetime on any number of
drugs. It drove up crime rates and the cost of health care,
ruining families and wreaking havoc in the black community.
Way to go.
TOO SUM UP: Whether it was education
policy, welfare policy, economic policy, foreign policy or
social policy, time after time after time what became the
guiding lights of modern American liberalism proved to be
utter disasters. Obvious consequences were ignored and
unintended consequences were rampant. All too frequently
people who were supposed to be helped -- African-Americans,
the poor, the Vietnamese and Cambodians, women, the young --
were severely harmed. Most disturbingly, the proponents of
these policies seemed to simply shrug their shoulders at the
results and move straight on the next disaster.
time? The idea is to provide a driver's license to illegal
aliens. In other words, an official government photo ID that
can be used to facilitate everything from voting to travel to
obtaining government benefits for people who aren't American
citizens. Smart, no?
Liberalism today as a philosophy
is burning up faster than Southern California. Bereft of
common sense, wreaking havoc on whole sections of the American
and global population, it is still being championed by
followers utterly oblivious to the consequences already long
on the record.
"I have a million ideas," Senator
Clinton said recently, thoughtfully adding that "the country
can't afford them all."
Let me again say that it would be just as easy to put together a list of
conservative embarrassments. But you don't need one with our "neutral"
media happy to provide it for you.
Articles like this don't come along every day, so you should see them when