Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details
Contact Form
Showing posts with label Thomas Sowell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thomas Sowell. Show all posts
Friday, September 4, 2015
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Thomas Sowell's Viewpoint On The Giuliani Flag Is Intriguing.
Giuliani Versus Obama
Thomas Sowell
2/24/2015 12:01:00 AM - Thomas Sowell
The firestorm of denunciation of former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani, for having said that he did not think Barack Obama loved America, is in one sense out of all proportion to that remark -- especially at a time when there are much bigger issues, including wars raging, terrorist atrocities and a nuclear Iran on the horizon.
Against that background of strife and dangers on the world stage, it may seem as if Barack Obama's feelings, or Rudolph Giuliani's opinion about those feelings, should not matter so much, especially when it is hard to know with certainty how anyone feels. Yet when someone is the leader of a great nation at a historic juncture, it is more than idle curiosity to know what drives him.
It is not clear what the basis was for so much outrage at Mayor Giuliani's opinion about President Obama. Was it that what Giuliani said was demonstrably false? Was it that Barack Obama is supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty?
Anyone who simply looks at the factual evidence as to whether Obama loves America, or does not, will find remarkably little to suggest love and a large amount of evidence, over a long period of years, showing his constant close association with people fiercely hostile to this country. Jeremiah Wright was just one in a long series of such people.
Barack Obama's campaign promise to "fundamentally change the United States of America" hardly suggests love. Nor did his international speaking tour in 2009, telling foreign audiences that America was to blame for problems on the world stage.
President Obama's record in the White House has been more of the same. Among his earliest acts were offending our oldest and closest allies, Britain and Israel, and betraying the country's previous commitments to provide anti-missile defenses to Poland and the Czech Republic.
Obama's refusal to let Ukraine have weapons with which to defend itself from Russian invasion was consistent with this pattern, and consistent with his whispered statement -- picked up by a microphone that was still on -- to tell "Vladimir" that, after the 2012 election was over, he would be able to "have more 'flexibility.'"
Conceivably, these might all have been simply blunders. But such a string of blunders would require someone very stupid, and Barack Obama is by no means stupid. The net effect is that in Europe, the Middle East and Asia, America's allies and America's interests face far more setbacks and dangers today than when Obama took office.
His policies have been publicly criticized by two of his own former Secretaries of Defense, by two retired four-star generals who served during his administration, and a retired four-star admiral who also served in the Middle East during the Obama administration has called his policies "anti-American."
Some people who are denouncing former mayor Rudolph Giuliani seem to be saying that it is just not right to accuse a President of the United States of being unpatriotic. But when Barack Obama was a Senator, that is precisely what he said about President George W. Bush. Where was the outrage then?
If all else fails, critics of Mayor Giuliani can say that a man is entitled to be considered "innocent until proven guilty." But that principle applies in a court of law. Outside a court of law, there is no reason to presume anyone innocent until proven guilty. It is especially dangerous to presume a President of the United States -- any president -- innocent until proven guilty.
Whoever is president has the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans, and the fate of a nation, in his hands. It is those millions of people and that nation who deserve the benefit of the doubt. We need to err on the side of safety for the people and the country. Squeamish politeness to an individual cannot outweigh that.
We need to keep that in mind for the next president, and for all future presidents. We might have been better off if the question of Obama's patriotism had been raised before he was first elected. Never should we ignore so many red flag warnings again.
There is little that can be done about President Obama now, no matter what he does. Impeachment, even if it succeeded, would mean Joe Biden as president and riots across the country. It is hard to know which would be worse.
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Some Slaves Were Freed 160 Years Ago, Most Still Live On The Plantation.
Read More About: Allen West, Ben Carson, Frederick Douglas, Harriet Taubman, Mia Love and Brenda Battle Jordan, Thom. Sowell
Share This Post
0
By Brenda Battle Jordan
Aug 17, 2014
Liberals are afraid of black conservatives. Black conservatives mean the end to their rhetoric and threaten to shatter the chains of dependency. Harriet Tubman said, “I freed a thousand slaves. I could have freed a thousand more; if only they knew they were slaves.” If only Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman were here now to stand with Allen West, Ben Carson, Thomas Sowell, Mia Love, Brenda Jordan and many more…
As a black conservative often times you are thought of as an Uncle Tom or perhaps a traitor to your own race… Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman are heroes…Their strength and conviction to free blacks from slavery are a testament to what happens when individuals think more of their community than themselves and are willing to risk everything for a cause greater than themselves.
In comparison, modern black “leaders” like Jesse Jackson Jr. and Al Sharpton are tiny and self-serving. They don’t serve black Americans or champion freedom and liberty for all. They champion liberal politics and ideology, and that’s odd; liberals want to see blacks tucked neatly into the roles of their design.
There has been much written about the racial rhetoric that has permeated political discourse since President Obama took office, and the media often highlights the racially inflammatory language used by some of his opponents. But racially charged language targeting black Republicans rarely receives much coverage, further fueling conservative suspicion of the mainstream media.
Yet, neither Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, nor the liberal elites who prop them up represent the true values of the black community. Most black folks oppose abortion, support traditional marriage and favor school choice. Black leaders ignore these facts and dance to the tune of their liberal benefactors.
My convictions come from my proud black father who took me out of foster care, raised me as a single Dad and never took a dime of government assistance. They come from my church upbringing which taught me to trust God, not government. Black conservatives want to break the cycle of poverty in the black community, not use it to perpetuate the grievance industry.
Who are the real sell-outs? Who are the real racists?” After seventy percent of black voters supported California’s Proposition 8, defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman, they were called homophobes, bigots and ingrates. The black community’s support of Proposition 8 was characterized as a “betrayal” of those who claimed a right to their loyalty — the liberal establishment.
One hundred and fifty years after slavery, a new generation now claims ownership of the thoughts and behavior of Americans of African descent. These ersatz masters believe they deserve absolute fealty. Slave owners usually think themselves beneficent, but those who thirst for freedom have a different perspective. We have largely rid ourselves of the old racism. It is time to rid ourselves of the new form.
The burden is on the liberal elites in the Democrat Party and the media to end the paternalism and condescension with which they treat the black community, and renounce the hateful attempts to destroy black conservatives. They need to stop pointing the finger of racism at others and take a hard look at themselves. They are not the racial conscience of the country, but the cause of racial regression.
MT. MORRIS TWP, MI — Brenda Battle-Jordan, a member of the Genesee County Republican Executive Committee, has announced her campaign for a seat on the county Board of Commissioners.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Conservative Musings Favorite Uncle--Uncle Tom Sowell!
Dr. Thomas Sowell
Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Thomas Sowell On Trayvon, Hoodies and Geraldo
Thomas Sowell is articulate and we agree with his posting today. We covered our viewpoint over the past couple days on Geraldo, the hoodie and the unfortuante death of Trayvon Martin, however, when we read an article by someone who has experienced racism, who understands the "gangsta" issue with young people, we believe it is valuable to read.
Conservative Tom
Geraldo's Point
It is not often that I agree with Geraldo Rivera, but recently he said something very practical and potentially life-saving, when he urged black and Hispanic parents not to let their children go around wearing hoodies.
There is no point in dressing like a hoodlum when you are not a hoodlum, even though that has become a fashion for some minority youths, including the teenager who was shot and killed in a confrontation in Florida. I don't know the whole story of that tragedy, any more than those who are making loud noises in the media do, but that is something that we have trials for.
People have a right to dress any way they want to, but exercising that right is something that requires common sense, and common sense is something that parents should have, even if their children don't always have it.
Many years ago, when I was a student at Harvard, there was a warning to all the students to avoid a nearby tough Irish neighborhood, where Harvard students had been attacked. It so happened that there was a black neighborhood on the other side of the Irish neighborhood that I had to pass through when I went to get my hair cut.
I never went through that Irish neighborhood dressed in the style of most Harvard students back then. I walked through that Irish neighborhood dressed like a black working man would be dressed -- and I never had the slightest trouble the whole three years that I was at Harvard.
While I had a right to walk through that tough neighborhood dressed in a Brooks Brothers suit, if I wanted to -- and if I could have afforded one, which I couldn't -- it made no sense for me to court needless dangers.
The man who shot the black teenager in Florida may be as guilty as sin, for all I know -- or he may be innocent, for all I know. We pay taxes so that there can be judges and jurors who sort out the facts. We do not need Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or the President of the United States spouting off before the trial has even begun. Have we forgotten the media's rush to judgment in the Duke University "rape" case that blew up completely when the facts came out?
If the facts show that a teenager who was no threat to anyone was shot and killed, it will be time to call for the death penalty. But if the facts show that the shooter was innocent, then it will be time to call for people in the media and in politics to keep their big mouths shut until they know what they are talking about.
Playing with racial polarization is playing with fire.
Much has been made of the fact that the teenager was unarmed. The only time I have ever pointed a loaded gun at a human being, I had no idea whether he was armed or not. All I knew was that I could hear his footsteps sneaking up behind me at night.
Fortunately for both of us, he froze in his tracks when I pointed a gun at him. If he had made a false move, I would have shot him. And if it had turned out later that he was unarmed, I would not have lost a moment's sleep over it.
You know that someone was unarmed only after it is all over. If he attacks, you have to shoot, if only to keep the attacker from getting your gun.
It so happened that the man I pointed a gun at was white. But he could have been any color of the rainbow, and it would not have made the slightest difference.
Let the specific facts come out in the Florida case. That is why we have courts.
Have we forgotten the Jim Crow era, with courts making decisions based on the race of the defendants, rather than the facts of the case? That is part of the past that we need to leave in the past, not resurrect it under new racial management.
Who is really showing concern for the well-being of minority youngsters, Geraldo Rivera who is trying to save some lives, or Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others who are hyping this tragic episode for their own benefit?
Race hustlers who hype paranoia and belligerence are doing no favor to minority youngsters. There is no way to know how many of these youngsters' confrontations with the police or others in authority have been needlessly aggravated by the steady drumbeat of racial hype they have been bombarded with by race hustlers.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Obama Admin: Distruptive Students Must Be Punished The Same As Good Students
This administration has lost it good sense, that is if it had any in the first place. Thomas Sowell writes today about a program between the Justice Department and the Education Department to equalize punishment in schools. In other words, girls should be punished as much as boys, Asian females as much as black males and while males as much as black males. Is this crazy or what?
It is call "equity" and as such means that certain groups will be punished less. Guess who that might be? It is race pandering and is hurting the very people that it is meant to help, those black and other minority students who want to learn and make something of themselves.
We say throw the trouble makers out of school and bring back the schools for delinquents, re-institute corporal punishment in the schools and give teachers the authority to ban students from their class if they are disrupting the educational process. In other words, let the teachers teach and the students learn. Maybe then we can have "no child left behind."
This whole movement toward making things equal is idiotic. No two people are equal, we all have different abilities, drive and aspirations, so why are we trying to make everyone the same? Encourage the differences but let it be in a caring, nurturing educational environment that all students can learn without having to put up with troublemakers.
Read more what Thomas Sowell has to say in the following link.
Conservative Tom
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2012/03/13/sowell-the-big-hoax/?subscriber=1
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Thomas Sowell on Newt
Newt is one of the leaders of the race for the Republican Party candidate, so as we find articles by respected commentators, we plan to post them.
Thomas Sowell is a great writer and observer and we respect his opinion. Do you agree with him? Let us know.
Conservative Tom
Thomas Sowell: Knocks on Newt have little to do with his work as elected official
December 19, 2011
By Thomas Sowell
If Newt Gingrich were being nominated for sainthood, many of us would vote very differently from the way we would vote if he were being nominated for a political office.
What the media call Gingrich’s “baggage” concerns largely his personal life and the fact that he made a lot of money running a consulting firm after he left Congress. This kind of stuff makes lots of talking points that we will no doubt hear, again and again, over the next weeks and months.
But how much weight should we give to this stuff when we are talking about the future of a nation?
This is not just another election and Barack Obama is not just another president whose policies we may not like. With all of President Obama’s broken promises, glib demagoguery and cynical political moves, one promise he has kept all too well. That was his boast on the eve of the 2008 election: “We are going to change the United States of America.”
Many Americans are already saying that they can hardly recognize the country they grew up in. We have already started down the path that has led Western European nations to the brink of financial disaster.
Internationally, it is worse. A president who has pulled the rug out from under our allies, whether in Eastern Europe or the Middle East, tried to cozy up to our enemies, and has bowed low from the waist to foreign leaders certainly has not represented either the values or the interests of America. If he continues to do nothing that is likely to stop terrorist-sponsoring Iran from getting nuclear weapons, the consequences can be beyond our worst imagining.
Against this background, how much does Newt Gingrich’s personal life matter, whether we accept his claim that he has now matured or his critics’ claim that he has not? Nor should we sell the public short by saying that they are going to vote on the basis of tabloid stuff or media talking points, when the fate of this nation hangs in the balance.
Even back in the 19th century, when the scandal came out that Grover Cleveland had fathered a child out of wedlock — and he publicly admitted it — the voters nevertheless sent him to the White House, where he became one of the better presidents.
Do we wish we had another Ronald Reagan? We could certainly use one. But we have to play the hand we were dealt. And the Reagan card is not in the deck.
While the televised debates are what gave Newt Gingrich’s candidacy a big boost, concrete accomplishments when in office are the real test. Gingrich engineered the first Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 40 years — followed by the first balanced budget in 40 years. The media called it “the Clinton surplus,” but all spending bills start in the House of Representatives, and Gingrich was speaker of the House.
Speaker Gingrich also produced some long overdue welfare reforms, despite howls from liberals that the poor would be devastated. But nobody makes that claim any more.
Did Gingrich ruffle some feathers when he was speaker of the House? Yes, enough for it to cost him that position. But he also showed that he could produce results.
In a world where we can make our choices only among the alternatives actually available, the question is whether Newt Gingrich is better than Barack Obama — and better than Mitt Romney.
Romney is a smooth talker, but what did he actually accomplish as governor of Massachusetts, compared to what Gingrich accomplished as Speaker of the House? When you don’t accomplish much, you don’t ruffle many feathers. But is that what we want?
Can you name one important positive thing that Romney accomplished as governor of Massachusetts? Can anyone? Does a candidate who represents the bland leading the bland increase the chances of victory in November 2012? A lot of candidates like that have lost, from Thomas E. Dewey to John McCain.
Those who want to concentrate on the baggage in Newt Gingrich’s past, rather than on the nation’s future, should remember what Winston Churchill said: “If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost.” If that means a second term for Barack Obama, then it means lost big-time.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University and syndicated columnist
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)