ICO Editor
Seven years ago President Clinton said we needed “to save Social Security for the 21st Century.” A year later, in his State of the Union address, he announced a plan to "save" Social Security and fund a new type of retirement savings account. Now, even though nothing was done, Democrats say that Social Security is OK and that retirement savings accounts are a bad idea. What changed?
The Editor of the ICO does not think there is a Social Security crisis. He said its trust fund will last until at least 2042. The trust fund, as we all know, is full of Treasury Bonds (government IOU’s) to replace the surplus funds that the general fund “borrowed” and our government spent. Senator “Fritz” Hollings, D-S. Car., says Social Security is being destroyed because the trust fund has been “looted.”
Just what are these government IOU’s in the trust fund? Back in my CPA working years, we called bonds “liabilities,” because they must eventually be repaid. However, our government puts its IOU’s in a “trust fund” and calls them “cash” (an asset).
Just how is the government going to use the trust fund to pay Social Security obligations when cash outflow exceeds inflow in 2018? There are very few options. Taxes could be raised, general fund expenditures could be cut, or borrowing increased. Also, the Social Security tax rate could be increased, benefits cut, or retirement age increased. The point is, one or more of these options have to start in 2018, not 2042. And the second point is, each and every one of these options hurts economic growth and personal savings. The final point, Social Security still is not saved, just extended on life support.
Next week, saving Social Security with personal retirement accounts, just like the ones government employees already have.
(Note to Steve: National debt as a percentage of GDP has been higher in the past, and is already coming back down. It, like many other things, is only considered a crisis by Democrats when Republicans are in power.)
Monday, January 17, 2005
Monday, December 20, 2004
Our 2004 Christmas Letter
20 December 2004
We wish you and yours the merriest Christmas and the happiest New Year!
In a recent exchange of opinions via letters to our local weekly newspaper, I was accused of wearing “rose colored glasses.” Alice and I are too optimistic. We think life is good. We enjoy our lives, friends, and families. What is wrong with us? Have we lived lives without loss, sadness, regret, challenge? Are we in denial, unable to see how tough life is, how messed up the world is? In a word, no. We have lost, and sorely miss, many of our closest family and friends throughout our 62 years. Many of our loved ones are gravely ill or struggling with infirmities and disabilities. That means that we are a part of humanity, too.
Now a brief recap of the past year. The highlight was Alice and her brother Rob hosting a three-day 90th birthday party for their father, George Dickinson, at Newport Beach in July. Besides the party, we stayed fairly close to home this year. We went to Mexico for two weeks; a week in Mexico City, and a week studying Spanish in Cuernavaca. We had planned to visit friends at Lake Tahoe but had to cancel because my real estate job got too busy. In fact, the past year has been busier than the four previous years combined, and my “hobby” has become hard work. Be careful what you wish for, because wishes may come true.
Shortly after George’s birthday party, we had company for 19 nights in a 36-day period. We were serious when we invited everyone to visit, and for awhile it looked like everyone was taking us up on our offer. Alice is very busy in a book club she joined this year and is enjoying it immensely. She said she studies harder for book club meetings than she ever did in school, and just for sheer pleasure. Her company, Vulcan Incorporated, just gets better and better, thanks to the employees’ “sweat equity” ownership program Alice started years ago.
Buddy, who nipped a jogger’s nipple to escape from city life, continues to show that crime does pay. Buddy now is rarely more than an arm’s length away from one of us, except when he is visiting his other family including his little sister Duchess in Walnut Creek. He spends a lot of time in the woods, on the beaches, chasing rabbits, deer, wild turkeys, and skunks. I wish the little stinker would drop skunks from his list, but “if it runs, Buddy chases it.” I'm glad there are no bull elephants in Gualala!
Soon we will be on the road for Christmas, New Years, and family birthdays. Then later in January we go to Thailand for a few weeks, return in time for Alice’s high school reunion – then I’ll have to catch up on two months of neglected real estate work in about a week. Alice and I already feel tired just thinking about all that is before us! Like getting this in the mail before Christmas Eve.
Best wishes for now and for tomorrow, and for all your tomorrows.
Alice and Michael
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Jimmy Carter, Our Heart's Desire
Editor
I am very glad that Brady Klopfer included the H. L. Mencken quote: “On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” I knew there had to be some explanation for Jimmy Carter. I wonder what explanation Mencken had for Bill Clinton?
To give credit where credit is due, it was the majority of eligible voters (led by Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican president), that first voted in the reforms which ended slavery, and later brought universal suffrage. Only forty years ago Republicans overcame the opposition of Southern Democrats to pass landmark civil rights legislation. Yes, the minorities that opposed these reforms were wrong, the majorities were right.
Now, as then, Republicans are the primary force for reform, against reactionary Democrat policies. In the United States, President Bush is providing bold leadership to finally reform Social Security, public education, immigration and Medicare, reforms which should have been done but weren’t during the long period dominated by the “do nothing” Democrats.
President Bush also has a vision for a world free of the tyranny of religious extremists and terrorists. In Afghanistan, women vote, attend school, can work outside their homes, and no longer need suffer the pain and humiliation of genital mutilation. Afghanis are free to worship or not worship as they please. In Iraq, the majority Shiites and minority Kurds were freed from Sunni oppression and will soon control their own destinies. Twice in January, in historical firsts, Arabs will freely elect their own leaders.
“If people are not liberals at 20, they have no hearts. If they are still liberals at 30, they have no brains.” The election results show we have a brainy majority.
I am very glad that Brady Klopfer included the H. L. Mencken quote: “On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” I knew there had to be some explanation for Jimmy Carter. I wonder what explanation Mencken had for Bill Clinton?
To give credit where credit is due, it was the majority of eligible voters (led by Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican president), that first voted in the reforms which ended slavery, and later brought universal suffrage. Only forty years ago Republicans overcame the opposition of Southern Democrats to pass landmark civil rights legislation. Yes, the minorities that opposed these reforms were wrong, the majorities were right.
Now, as then, Republicans are the primary force for reform, against reactionary Democrat policies. In the United States, President Bush is providing bold leadership to finally reform Social Security, public education, immigration and Medicare, reforms which should have been done but weren’t during the long period dominated by the “do nothing” Democrats.
President Bush also has a vision for a world free of the tyranny of religious extremists and terrorists. In Afghanistan, women vote, attend school, can work outside their homes, and no longer need suffer the pain and humiliation of genital mutilation. Afghanis are free to worship or not worship as they please. In Iraq, the majority Shiites and minority Kurds were freed from Sunni oppression and will soon control their own destinies. Twice in January, in historical firsts, Arabs will freely elect their own leaders.
“If people are not liberals at 20, they have no hearts. If they are still liberals at 30, they have no brains.” The election results show we have a brainy majority.
Monday, November 08, 2004
After We Won! 2004
In this Fools Paradise for Liberal Democrats, I would like to say some nice words of consolation: You have very good looking political yard signs here in the Land of the Lost.
You have already picked a sure-fire winning rationale for your loss – American voters are too uneducated and uninformed to be trusted to vote intelligently. Since the Left dominates public education and the main stream media, it is interesting to hear that we, the ignorant right-wing scum (as I was labeled in a letter to the ICO) are the fruits of your labors.
You accuse us of being violent and narrow-minded, and yet it is our yard signs that are destroyed as fast as they are put up, and yours aren’t. I spent hundreds of dollars, and several hours of driving, to provide a friend two large Bush/Cheney signs. He spent time and materials to place them on his property, and within two days they were gone. Many Republican friends would not display the smaller yard signs and bumper stickers I bought for them, because they were afraid of vandalism and their neighbors’ reactions.
You say that now the election is over, President Bush and the growing Republican majorities in the House and Senate should work with you. How about you working with us? Did the thought ever occur to you that if your ideas are better than ours, you would have won, and would be leading?
You challenged us to watch Fahrenheit 9/11, and we did, but then we watched Fahrenhype 9/11 to learn of all the lies and distortions Michael Moore fed to a gullible audience. I challenge you to watch Fahrenhype 9/11 – the truth may set you free, believing lies won’t.
I feel your pain, and am glad it’s not mine.
You have already picked a sure-fire winning rationale for your loss – American voters are too uneducated and uninformed to be trusted to vote intelligently. Since the Left dominates public education and the main stream media, it is interesting to hear that we, the ignorant right-wing scum (as I was labeled in a letter to the ICO) are the fruits of your labors.
You accuse us of being violent and narrow-minded, and yet it is our yard signs that are destroyed as fast as they are put up, and yours aren’t. I spent hundreds of dollars, and several hours of driving, to provide a friend two large Bush/Cheney signs. He spent time and materials to place them on his property, and within two days they were gone. Many Republican friends would not display the smaller yard signs and bumper stickers I bought for them, because they were afraid of vandalism and their neighbors’ reactions.
You say that now the election is over, President Bush and the growing Republican majorities in the House and Senate should work with you. How about you working with us? Did the thought ever occur to you that if your ideas are better than ours, you would have won, and would be leading?
You challenged us to watch Fahrenheit 9/11, and we did, but then we watched Fahrenhype 9/11 to learn of all the lies and distortions Michael Moore fed to a gullible audience. I challenge you to watch Fahrenhype 9/11 – the truth may set you free, believing lies won’t.
I feel your pain, and am glad it’s not mine.
Friday, September 10, 2004
World A Better Place Without Saddam?
“Anti-war” Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle and John Kerry wrote on Oct. 9, 1998, in a letter to the Clinton White House: "[W]e urge you …to take necessary actions …to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Bill Clinton responded. On December 16, 1998, he unleashed Operation Desert Fox "...to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, and its military capacity to threaten their neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national interests of the United States..."
Previously, on February 17, 1998, Bill Clinton noted: "Saddam's son-in-law and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan." Therefore, Clinton said, “(we know Iraq has) an offensive biological warfare capability, notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum...2,000 gallons of anthrax, 25 biological-filled scud warheads, and 157 aerial bombs."
Surprisingly, Senator Tom Daschle, D-S.D., recently praised the Bush administration's war and nation-building work in Iraq and said he has no serious concerns about the lack of weapons of mass destruction.
"I give the effort overall real credit," Daschle said. "It is a good thing Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. It is a good thing we are democratizing the country." Does it sound like the world is a better place without Saddam in power?
“Perhaps so,” huffed the ICO Editor.
With the Taliban gone, Al-Queda on the run, Saddam captured, no terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11, Libya and Iran admitting nuclear arms plotting, North Korea cheating exposed, United Nations Resolutions on Iraq finally enforced, and even senior Democrats applauding – perhaps even the ICO Editor will admit the world is a far better place without Saddam. Because Saddam caused the deaths of three million Moslems, more than any other person ever, even some Moslems admit the world is a better place without him.
Facts, not opinions.
Bill Clinton responded. On December 16, 1998, he unleashed Operation Desert Fox "...to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, and its military capacity to threaten their neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national interests of the United States..."
Previously, on February 17, 1998, Bill Clinton noted: "Saddam's son-in-law and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan." Therefore, Clinton said, “(we know Iraq has) an offensive biological warfare capability, notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum...2,000 gallons of anthrax, 25 biological-filled scud warheads, and 157 aerial bombs."
Surprisingly, Senator Tom Daschle, D-S.D., recently praised the Bush administration's war and nation-building work in Iraq and said he has no serious concerns about the lack of weapons of mass destruction.
"I give the effort overall real credit," Daschle said. "It is a good thing Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. It is a good thing we are democratizing the country." Does it sound like the world is a better place without Saddam in power?
“Perhaps so,” huffed the ICO Editor.
With the Taliban gone, Al-Queda on the run, Saddam captured, no terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11, Libya and Iran admitting nuclear arms plotting, North Korea cheating exposed, United Nations Resolutions on Iraq finally enforced, and even senior Democrats applauding – perhaps even the ICO Editor will admit the world is a far better place without Saddam. Because Saddam caused the deaths of three million Moslems, more than any other person ever, even some Moslems admit the world is a better place without him.
Facts, not opinions.
Friday, September 03, 2004
You won't find this in the San Francisco Chronicle, or the New York (All the news that's fit to print) Times.
Establishment Survey (W-2 payroll employment)Total employment as of December 2000 = 131.878 million
Total employment as of August 2004 = 131.475 million
So, the truth is that 403,000 W-2 jobs have been lost since George Bush took office; not the 900,000, 1 million, or even the 2 million that you see, from time to time, in various liberal and partisan-Democratic circles.
On the other hand:Household Survey (W-2 employment, 1099 contractors, self-employment, etc.)Total employment as of December 2000 = 135.836 million
Total employment as of August 2004 = 139.681 million
Hmm. I don't think the Associated Press, the New York Times, MSNBC, or Reuters, want to run the following headline: "Economy generates nearly 4 million net jobs under George W. Bush." So, therefore, it would appear that the establishment survey is the one with which the liberal media will continue to be preoccupied.
Establishment Survey (W-2 payroll employment)Total employment as of December 2000 = 131.878 million
Total employment as of August 2004 = 131.475 million
So, the truth is that 403,000 W-2 jobs have been lost since George Bush took office; not the 900,000, 1 million, or even the 2 million that you see, from time to time, in various liberal and partisan-Democratic circles.
On the other hand:Household Survey (W-2 employment, 1099 contractors, self-employment, etc.)Total employment as of December 2000 = 135.836 million
Total employment as of August 2004 = 139.681 million
Hmm. I don't think the Associated Press, the New York Times, MSNBC, or Reuters, want to run the following headline: "Economy generates nearly 4 million net jobs under George W. Bush." So, therefore, it would appear that the establishment survey is the one with which the liberal media will continue to be preoccupied.
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
John Kerry Invents Virtual Foreign Relations
Editor,
John Kerry’s latest TV ads accuse President Bush of “misleading America.” Yet just a week ago, John Kerry said: "I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' Things like that."
Interestingly, there is no evidence that John Kerry met with any foreign leaders since he began his campaign. In fact, the only time he was in the same town (Wash., D.C.) as a foreign leader was Sept. 24, 2003. On that same day, President Bush was in New York meeting with the leaders of Germany, India, Pakistan, Ghana and Mozambique.
Apparently John Kerry feels that if he did talk to foreign leaders, they would tell him how much they prefer him, so why go to all the trouble – just report what they would have said given the chance. Kim Jong Il, for example.
Kerry says President Bush “misleads.” In truth, John Kerry lies.
John Kerry’s latest TV ads accuse President Bush of “misleading America.” Yet just a week ago, John Kerry said: "I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' Things like that."
Interestingly, there is no evidence that John Kerry met with any foreign leaders since he began his campaign. In fact, the only time he was in the same town (Wash., D.C.) as a foreign leader was Sept. 24, 2003. On that same day, President Bush was in New York meeting with the leaders of Germany, India, Pakistan, Ghana and Mozambique.
Apparently John Kerry feels that if he did talk to foreign leaders, they would tell him how much they prefer him, so why go to all the trouble – just report what they would have said given the chance. Kim Jong Il, for example.
Kerry says President Bush “misleads.” In truth, John Kerry lies.
Monday, August 02, 2004
Do They Have To Retake The Senate Picture?
Editor
Recently 24 recipients of the Medal of Honor released a letter criticizing Kerry for voting against a $1.3 billion increase in veterans' health care benefits and missing some Senate votes related to veterans.
Kerry says he supports veterans’ health care benefits and President Bush doesn’t. However, a recent study shows veterans’ benefits went up 30 percent in eight years of Clinton, and 40 percent in three years of Bush.
On June 21 Kerry rushed back to Washington, D.C. to register support for a guarantee of federal funding for veterans' health care. The Republicans postponed the vote. Kerry then charged that GOP leaders shelved the vote to disrupt his campaign and deny him an issue he has championed. Republicans replied that Kerry, often absent from the Senate during his campaign, was grandstanding. Later that day, the Senate official photo was taken in the chamber; had Kerry missed it, he would have been the only absentee.
Kerry, who has missed 89 percent of the Senate's votes this year as of Monday, and 64 percent last year (including several votes on veterans' health care issues)., said Bush should immediately call a special session of Congress to implement the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission. Kerry said he would interrupt his campaigning to be there for debate and voting "when necessary."
Why now? Do they have to retake the Senate picture?
Recently 24 recipients of the Medal of Honor released a letter criticizing Kerry for voting against a $1.3 billion increase in veterans' health care benefits and missing some Senate votes related to veterans.
Kerry says he supports veterans’ health care benefits and President Bush doesn’t. However, a recent study shows veterans’ benefits went up 30 percent in eight years of Clinton, and 40 percent in three years of Bush.
On June 21 Kerry rushed back to Washington, D.C. to register support for a guarantee of federal funding for veterans' health care. The Republicans postponed the vote. Kerry then charged that GOP leaders shelved the vote to disrupt his campaign and deny him an issue he has championed. Republicans replied that Kerry, often absent from the Senate during his campaign, was grandstanding. Later that day, the Senate official photo was taken in the chamber; had Kerry missed it, he would have been the only absentee.
Kerry, who has missed 89 percent of the Senate's votes this year as of Monday, and 64 percent last year (including several votes on veterans' health care issues)., said Bush should immediately call a special session of Congress to implement the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission. Kerry said he would interrupt his campaigning to be there for debate and voting "when necessary."
Why now? Do they have to retake the Senate picture?
Saturday, July 10, 2004
Bush Smarter Than Kerry - Duh?
Editor
The Washington Times reported yet another Kerry lie, this one told repeatedly of how he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Since United Nations ambassadors from many of the Security Council nations are saying the meeting never occurred, I guess it will be up to our Main Stream Media to attack these ambassadors in the same way they attacked the Swift Boat veterans. Although the Swifties prevailed and proved John Kerry never spent Christmas 1968 in Cambodia, and by his own journal Kerry admitted he had not yet been in combat until the week after he supposedly was “wounded” for his first Purple Heart, the Main Stream Media continued to warp the truth.
The New York Times continues to fight for Kerry, now running a story about missing Iraqi high explosives even after NBC reported the explosives were gone before U. S, forces captured the site. Kerry and Edwards are making a big deal of the Times treatment of the story, making me wonder if they are saying we should have attacked sooner.
The New York Times sometimes gets it right. The Times just ran an article about President Bush having a higher IQ than Kerry, based on their scores on Officer Qualifying Tests (Bush scored at the 95th percentile, Kerry at the 91st). The article also reported that President Bush’s SAT score was 1206, which relates to an IQ of 129 and supports above a 95th percentile ranking. It is one point below qualifying President Bush for membership in Mensa. President Bush is measurably smarter than almost every liberal now reading this, with a Yale degree and a Harvard MBA for good measure.
The Washington Times reported yet another Kerry lie, this one told repeatedly of how he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Since United Nations ambassadors from many of the Security Council nations are saying the meeting never occurred, I guess it will be up to our Main Stream Media to attack these ambassadors in the same way they attacked the Swift Boat veterans. Although the Swifties prevailed and proved John Kerry never spent Christmas 1968 in Cambodia, and by his own journal Kerry admitted he had not yet been in combat until the week after he supposedly was “wounded” for his first Purple Heart, the Main Stream Media continued to warp the truth.
The New York Times continues to fight for Kerry, now running a story about missing Iraqi high explosives even after NBC reported the explosives were gone before U. S, forces captured the site. Kerry and Edwards are making a big deal of the Times treatment of the story, making me wonder if they are saying we should have attacked sooner.
The New York Times sometimes gets it right. The Times just ran an article about President Bush having a higher IQ than Kerry, based on their scores on Officer Qualifying Tests (Bush scored at the 95th percentile, Kerry at the 91st). The article also reported that President Bush’s SAT score was 1206, which relates to an IQ of 129 and supports above a 95th percentile ranking. It is one point below qualifying President Bush for membership in Mensa. President Bush is measurably smarter than almost every liberal now reading this, with a Yale degree and a Harvard MBA for good measure.
Monday, December 22, 2003
Liberal Bias Is A Proven Fact
Steve,
Since Mr. Finz “quoted” his grandmother in an earlier letter, I will “quote” mine: “You can lead a liberal to wisdom, but you can’t make him wise.” If I had known that the ICO would have allowed me more than 300 words for my letter, such as the over 400 words allowed Mr. Harry in his pointless “Hollow Argument” rebuttal, I would have included many more examples of studies documenting liberal bias in the media. Instead, I cited a web site, http://www.mediaresearch.org/ , that provides the results of many studies. I had hoped that open-minded truth seekers would go to the web site, there to learn for themselves the findings of liberal bias. Instead, Mr. Finz focused on just one of the findings I included, and didn’t even mention the others. Quoting myself:
“Also, a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that members of the media were four times as likely to identify themselves as ‘liberal’ than as ‘conservative.’
Over a 16-year period, the Republican presidential candidate always received less than 20 percent of the media’s vote.”
Another study found that 89 percent of Washington-based reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only seven percent voted for George Bush, with two percent choosing Ross Perot.
I could go on and on, but the ICO will edit me for brevity at the 300-word point, so I trust interested readers will seek truth themselves. I did not make the findings up – the Los Angeles Times, Kaiser Family Foundation, Gallup Poll, Harris Poll, the American Association of Newspaper Editors, the U. S. New and World Report, the Freedom Forum, Editor & Publisher magazine, major colleges and universities, and many others are responsible.
As the studies found, most Americans (including liberals) believe there is a liberal bias in the media. Mr. Finz and Mr. Harry should challenge these studies with facts, rather than opinions.
My oldest son, Sgt Bruce Combs, arrived safely back from Iraq via Kuwait on December 5. Alice and I are very proud of him and all he served with, who are working hard to protect even the ignorant and ungrateful amongst us.
Since Mr. Finz “quoted” his grandmother in an earlier letter, I will “quote” mine: “You can lead a liberal to wisdom, but you can’t make him wise.” If I had known that the ICO would have allowed me more than 300 words for my letter, such as the over 400 words allowed Mr. Harry in his pointless “Hollow Argument” rebuttal, I would have included many more examples of studies documenting liberal bias in the media. Instead, I cited a web site, http://www.mediaresearch.org/ , that provides the results of many studies. I had hoped that open-minded truth seekers would go to the web site, there to learn for themselves the findings of liberal bias. Instead, Mr. Finz focused on just one of the findings I included, and didn’t even mention the others. Quoting myself:
“Also, a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that members of the media were four times as likely to identify themselves as ‘liberal’ than as ‘conservative.’
Over a 16-year period, the Republican presidential candidate always received less than 20 percent of the media’s vote.”
Another study found that 89 percent of Washington-based reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only seven percent voted for George Bush, with two percent choosing Ross Perot.
I could go on and on, but the ICO will edit me for brevity at the 300-word point, so I trust interested readers will seek truth themselves. I did not make the findings up – the Los Angeles Times, Kaiser Family Foundation, Gallup Poll, Harris Poll, the American Association of Newspaper Editors, the U. S. New and World Report, the Freedom Forum, Editor & Publisher magazine, major colleges and universities, and many others are responsible.
As the studies found, most Americans (including liberals) believe there is a liberal bias in the media. Mr. Finz and Mr. Harry should challenge these studies with facts, rather than opinions.
My oldest son, Sgt Bruce Combs, arrived safely back from Iraq via Kuwait on December 5. Alice and I are very proud of him and all he served with, who are working hard to protect even the ignorant and ungrateful amongst us.
When Did Serbia Attack Us?
Steve,
Since Mr. Finz determined not to waste any more time on an unworthy adversary such as myself, and unilaterally declared victory and an end to dead horse beating, I guess I will just have to find other simple amusements. Mr. Finz and Mr. Wasserman did not comment on any of the studies of liberal bias in the web site I referenced, and continued to write in their fact-free styles. They probably also will not read an excellent article, “War When we’re not attacked – Comparing Serbia with Iraq”, by Tom Campbell, who served five terms in Congress and was a member of the House International Relations Committee. Truth seekers can find the article in the Opinions section of the December 21, 2003 San Francisco Chronicle. Or go to http://www.sfgate.com/ and search for Campbell in Article - archive for December 21, 2003.
I will summarize the article: Serbia and Iraq are both instances of U.S. military action against a country that had not attacked us. Of the two, Iraq posed a greater threat to international peace, since Serbia had never attacked any of its neighbors, did not possess or use poison gas, and had not fired missiles into the territories of U. S. allies. Saddam Hussein gassed, shot, tortured and starved hundreds of thousands of his citizens, compared to the 2,000 killed by Milosevic in Kosovo. The occupation of Kosovo by NATO is in its fifth year. President Bush, contrary to Mr. Finz’s assertion that he directly defied the UN, had UN Security Council resolutions dating back to 1991 for authority, whereas President Clinton had nothing like that authority when he dropped the first bomb on Belgrade. President Clinton said Serbia posed a threat to NATO's security. President Bush said Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Mr. Campbell: “I can understand opposing (or supporting) U.S. action in both Iraq and Serbia. I can understand concluding that, on grounds of human rights, attacks on U.S. allies, international law and U.S. Constitutional law, the war in Iraq was a clearer case than the war in Serbia. To support the decision to attack Serbia, but not Iraq, however, is illogical.”
Mr. Campbell concludes: “It seems that it comes down to this: To some, President Bush can do no good, and President Clinton could do no wrong.”
Since Mr. Finz determined not to waste any more time on an unworthy adversary such as myself, and unilaterally declared victory and an end to dead horse beating, I guess I will just have to find other simple amusements. Mr. Finz and Mr. Wasserman did not comment on any of the studies of liberal bias in the web site I referenced, and continued to write in their fact-free styles. They probably also will not read an excellent article, “War When we’re not attacked – Comparing Serbia with Iraq”, by Tom Campbell, who served five terms in Congress and was a member of the House International Relations Committee. Truth seekers can find the article in the Opinions section of the December 21, 2003 San Francisco Chronicle. Or go to http://www.sfgate.com/ and search for Campbell in Article - archive for December 21, 2003.
I will summarize the article: Serbia and Iraq are both instances of U.S. military action against a country that had not attacked us. Of the two, Iraq posed a greater threat to international peace, since Serbia had never attacked any of its neighbors, did not possess or use poison gas, and had not fired missiles into the territories of U. S. allies. Saddam Hussein gassed, shot, tortured and starved hundreds of thousands of his citizens, compared to the 2,000 killed by Milosevic in Kosovo. The occupation of Kosovo by NATO is in its fifth year. President Bush, contrary to Mr. Finz’s assertion that he directly defied the UN, had UN Security Council resolutions dating back to 1991 for authority, whereas President Clinton had nothing like that authority when he dropped the first bomb on Belgrade. President Clinton said Serbia posed a threat to NATO's security. President Bush said Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Mr. Campbell: “I can understand opposing (or supporting) U.S. action in both Iraq and Serbia. I can understand concluding that, on grounds of human rights, attacks on U.S. allies, international law and U.S. Constitutional law, the war in Iraq was a clearer case than the war in Serbia. To support the decision to attack Serbia, but not Iraq, however, is illogical.”
Mr. Campbell concludes: “It seems that it comes down to this: To some, President Bush can do no good, and President Clinton could do no wrong.”
Friday, December 19, 2003
California - Revenue Shortage, Spending Surplus
Editor,
Your editorial, Junk Budget, December 12, 2003, was very amusing, since the ICO was not a critic of the Davis administration’s fiscal irresponsibility. When liberals bemoan reducing the regressive car tax just to criticize a Republican (a tax that hits the poor much harder than the rich, and then the rich take it as an itemized tax deduction, adding further salt to the wound!), it is true hypocrisy.
You are not alone in your liberal bias. The San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, and other willing accomplices of the Democratic majority that gave California the worst fiscal management of all fifty states (for details of the study that awarded California last place, see USA Today, June 23, 2003, Bad Moves, Not Economy, Behind Busted State Budgets, by Paul Overberg), also never editorialized against the spending that created the problem, but have been all over Governor Schwarzenegger for honoring his campaign promise to throw out the car tax increase. Good thing too, because that was one of the main promises that got him elected!
The problem in California can be summed up neatly. We did not have a shortage of revenue; we had an excess of spending. The only revenue shortage we experienced was due to our inflated expectations of taxes from the rich as they exercised stock options. California budget statistics show: 26% - Increase in state revenue from 1998-99 to 2002-03; 45% - Increase in total state spending from 1998-99 to 2002-03; 37% - Increase in just the General Fund portion of state spending from 1998-99 to 2002-03; and 37,000 - The number of new workers hired as of March 2003 in state government since the Governor's "hiring freeze" was imposed March 2002 (that's 37,000 new hires in ONE year!). Any questions?
Facts, not opinions.
Your editorial, Junk Budget, December 12, 2003, was very amusing, since the ICO was not a critic of the Davis administration’s fiscal irresponsibility. When liberals bemoan reducing the regressive car tax just to criticize a Republican (a tax that hits the poor much harder than the rich, and then the rich take it as an itemized tax deduction, adding further salt to the wound!), it is true hypocrisy.
You are not alone in your liberal bias. The San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, and other willing accomplices of the Democratic majority that gave California the worst fiscal management of all fifty states (for details of the study that awarded California last place, see USA Today, June 23, 2003, Bad Moves, Not Economy, Behind Busted State Budgets, by Paul Overberg), also never editorialized against the spending that created the problem, but have been all over Governor Schwarzenegger for honoring his campaign promise to throw out the car tax increase. Good thing too, because that was one of the main promises that got him elected!
The problem in California can be summed up neatly. We did not have a shortage of revenue; we had an excess of spending. The only revenue shortage we experienced was due to our inflated expectations of taxes from the rich as they exercised stock options. California budget statistics show: 26% - Increase in state revenue from 1998-99 to 2002-03; 45% - Increase in total state spending from 1998-99 to 2002-03; 37% - Increase in just the General Fund portion of state spending from 1998-99 to 2002-03; and 37,000 - The number of new workers hired as of March 2003 in state government since the Governor's "hiring freeze" was imposed March 2002 (that's 37,000 new hires in ONE year!). Any questions?
Facts, not opinions.
Tuesday, December 09, 2003
Our 2003 Christmas Letter
23 December 2003
But there is more. A lot more. By the grace of God and accident of birth, we were born into the most free and freedom loving land ever to grace the Earth, in 1942 when that freedom was most grievously threatened. Evil that should have been nipped in the bud almost destroyed liberty, while good people stood by and allowed it to grow. Hopefully we will never let that happen again.
In July we went on a Baltic cruise and visited the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Denmark, and Russia. To me, the highlight was two days spent in Saint Petersburg, Russia. The palaces and museums were unforgettable, Alice loved the colorful onion domed buildings, but my most lasting image was watching the young Russians coping with freedom. Many were fit and trim, stylishly dressed, well spoken and educated, and trying to take advantage of opportunities. Older Russians, however, may have wanted the old ways back. We ended our vacation in London, thoroughly enjoying “Mama Mia” and “time” at Greenwich.
Debbie and Joe had a dog Buddy, who nipped a jogger on the left nipple while Debbie was walking him in a park. Now Buddy is living with us. He jogs three miles with me most mornings, then walks to the beach with Alice in the afternoon. On mornings when Alice goes swimming, Buddy goes to the office with me, and loves showing property. We are both still on the School Board, and by invitation Buddy now goes to all the meetings too, so we don’t have to leave him alone and lonely. He is spoiled.
Other highlights of the year include Granddaughter Leaha visiting for three weeks, visits with friends and relatives here, in the Bay Area, Southern California, and Lake Tahoe, and completing the remodel and moving into our home among the redwoods. We love it here and hope all our friends and family plan to visit us soon.
A very Merry Christmas, and the happiest of New Years!
Monday, November 10, 2003
The Last Word In Liberal Media Bias
Editor,
Since Mr. Finz chose to attack both my intelligence and honesty concerning the media’s leftist bias, I would like to rub his nose in the following surveys by the American Association of Newspaper Editors (ASNE) in 1988 and 1997. The most recent ASNE study surveyed 1,037 newspaper reporters found 61 percent identified themselves as/leaning "liberal/Democratic" compared to only 15 percent who identified themselves as/leaning "conservative/Republican."
Also, a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that members of the media were four times as likely to identify themselves as "liberal" than as "conservative."
Over a 16-year period, the Republican presidential candidate always received less than 20 percent of the media’s vote.
There are many more polls and surveys on this issue, but a good starting point is www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics , which gives cites and links to each study.
There are also many quotes from news professionals admitting or pointing out the liberal bias in the news, but as always CBS News' Andy Rooney gets the last word. When discussing Bernard Goldberg's book Bias, which argues that the dominant media are biased in the liberal direction, on CNN's "Larry King Live" in June 2002: "There is just no question that I, among others [in the media], have a liberal bias. I mean, I'm consistently liberal in my opinions. And I think...Dan [Rather] is transparently liberal. Now, he may not like to hear me say that....But I think he should be more careful."
A postscript: This week we celebrated a man who made cutting taxes a defining moment of his presidency and boosted the U.S. economy to record heights. He also launched preemptive attacks against two brutal dictatorships. Today JFK would not be welcomed in his own party.
My oldest son, Sgt Bruce Combs, left Iraq for Kuwait and may be home in Las Vegas for Thanksgiving, we pray.
Since Mr. Finz chose to attack both my intelligence and honesty concerning the media’s leftist bias, I would like to rub his nose in the following surveys by the American Association of Newspaper Editors (ASNE) in 1988 and 1997. The most recent ASNE study surveyed 1,037 newspaper reporters found 61 percent identified themselves as/leaning "liberal/Democratic" compared to only 15 percent who identified themselves as/leaning "conservative/Republican."
Also, a 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that members of the media were four times as likely to identify themselves as "liberal" than as "conservative."
Over a 16-year period, the Republican presidential candidate always received less than 20 percent of the media’s vote.
There are many more polls and surveys on this issue, but a good starting point is www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics , which gives cites and links to each study.
There are also many quotes from news professionals admitting or pointing out the liberal bias in the news, but as always CBS News' Andy Rooney gets the last word. When discussing Bernard Goldberg's book Bias, which argues that the dominant media are biased in the liberal direction, on CNN's "Larry King Live" in June 2002: "There is just no question that I, among others [in the media], have a liberal bias. I mean, I'm consistently liberal in my opinions. And I think...Dan [Rather] is transparently liberal. Now, he may not like to hear me say that....But I think he should be more careful."
A postscript: This week we celebrated a man who made cutting taxes a defining moment of his presidency and boosted the U.S. economy to record heights. He also launched preemptive attacks against two brutal dictatorships. Today JFK would not be welcomed in his own party.
My oldest son, Sgt Bruce Combs, left Iraq for Kuwait and may be home in Las Vegas for Thanksgiving, we pray.
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Women In Black Get Fast Results!
Editor
Independent Coast Observer
This Friday the Women in Black demonstrated for an end to the war in their largest numbers yet. Friday evening I watched Coalition tanks cruising through Baghdad streets. Such fast results!
In a previous letter, I ended that the Iraqis would greet us by asking: “What took you so long?” As I watched TV news showing British soldiers liberating Basrah, and pictures of jubilant Iraqis thanking them and dancing on a British tank, they were shouting, “What took you so long!”
That the Iraqis are glad to see us is a mystery only to the Left. News that the Butcher of Baghdad has finally been overthrown has unleashed a torrent of eye witness accounts of atrocities his cruel regime inflicted on its own citizens: Iraqi death squads killing husbands and children in front of their wives and mothers; forcing civilians to be human shields while the Saddam loyalists attacked Coalition forces; and hiding military equipment in mosques and hospitals.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Saddam was responsible for the deaths of three million Iraqis and over a million Iranians. Along the way, Saddam gassed 5,000 Kurds, mostly women and children, in 1988.
In fact, Saddam is responsible for more Muslim deaths than any other person in history, including the total killed in all of the Crusades. Still, the Left stands up for Saddam, Osama, Yasser, and Fidel, and supports regime change only when discussing President Bush. The Left chants “no blood for oil,” but the French, Germans and Russians have profiteered selling armaments and building bunkers and palaces for Saddam with the oil money meant for sick and starving Iraqis.
I used to tell Leftists that “Saddam is no Boy Scout,” but I stopped saying that when I realized they thought I was complimenting Saddam.
Independent Coast Observer
This Friday the Women in Black demonstrated for an end to the war in their largest numbers yet. Friday evening I watched Coalition tanks cruising through Baghdad streets. Such fast results!
In a previous letter, I ended that the Iraqis would greet us by asking: “What took you so long?” As I watched TV news showing British soldiers liberating Basrah, and pictures of jubilant Iraqis thanking them and dancing on a British tank, they were shouting, “What took you so long!”
That the Iraqis are glad to see us is a mystery only to the Left. News that the Butcher of Baghdad has finally been overthrown has unleashed a torrent of eye witness accounts of atrocities his cruel regime inflicted on its own citizens: Iraqi death squads killing husbands and children in front of their wives and mothers; forcing civilians to be human shields while the Saddam loyalists attacked Coalition forces; and hiding military equipment in mosques and hospitals.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Saddam was responsible for the deaths of three million Iraqis and over a million Iranians. Along the way, Saddam gassed 5,000 Kurds, mostly women and children, in 1988.
In fact, Saddam is responsible for more Muslim deaths than any other person in history, including the total killed in all of the Crusades. Still, the Left stands up for Saddam, Osama, Yasser, and Fidel, and supports regime change only when discussing President Bush. The Left chants “no blood for oil,” but the French, Germans and Russians have profiteered selling armaments and building bunkers and palaces for Saddam with the oil money meant for sick and starving Iraqis.
I used to tell Leftists that “Saddam is no Boy Scout,” but I stopped saying that when I realized they thought I was complimenting Saddam.
Human Shields "Bug Out"
Editor
I'm glad Tom Cahill escaped from Iraq. Other human shields left Baghdad recently, and their experiences were reported by UPI and other news agencies. Two human shields were so shocked by Iraqi descriptions of atrocities committed by Saddam, that they switched from opposition to support of the war. Many other human shields left when they found the Iraqis wanted them to shield military targets.
Cahill's statement that human shields were specifically targeted seems as credible as the statements of Baghdad Bob, the Iraqi information officer who can say that there are no Coalition forces in Baghdad while a camera shot over his shoulder shows Coalition tanks roaming the banks of the Tigris.
During the phase of the war when shields would have been in transit, Coalition targeting was strategic, not tactical. Cahill is paranoid with delusions of grandeur to think that Coalition forces would, or ever could, identify and track the movements of inconsequential noncombatants.
If Cahill truly believes the stories, he was also a witness to a miracle: in fact, a double miracle, given the precision of Coalition missiles and bombs. Targeted buses? Dead human shields! The fact that they are not dead is proof in itself that they were not targeted and bombed.
Cahill will probably find many committed peace activists eager to repeat this story, and many others who lack the common sense to pick it apart. However, he should be careful not to expose the story to someone who can critically analyze it.
("Bug Out" - from the Korean War. When attacked by overwhelming forces, to "bug out" meant to throw your gun and gear away so the weight would not slow down your speedy departure!
"When the Chinese mortars begins to thuggin', the old Deuce Four begins to buggin' ")
I'm glad Tom Cahill escaped from Iraq. Other human shields left Baghdad recently, and their experiences were reported by UPI and other news agencies. Two human shields were so shocked by Iraqi descriptions of atrocities committed by Saddam, that they switched from opposition to support of the war. Many other human shields left when they found the Iraqis wanted them to shield military targets.
Cahill's statement that human shields were specifically targeted seems as credible as the statements of Baghdad Bob, the Iraqi information officer who can say that there are no Coalition forces in Baghdad while a camera shot over his shoulder shows Coalition tanks roaming the banks of the Tigris.
During the phase of the war when shields would have been in transit, Coalition targeting was strategic, not tactical. Cahill is paranoid with delusions of grandeur to think that Coalition forces would, or ever could, identify and track the movements of inconsequential noncombatants.
If Cahill truly believes the stories, he was also a witness to a miracle: in fact, a double miracle, given the precision of Coalition missiles and bombs. Targeted buses? Dead human shields! The fact that they are not dead is proof in itself that they were not targeted and bombed.
Cahill will probably find many committed peace activists eager to repeat this story, and many others who lack the common sense to pick it apart. However, he should be careful not to expose the story to someone who can critically analyze it.
("Bug Out" - from the Korean War. When attacked by overwhelming forces, to "bug out" meant to throw your gun and gear away so the weight would not slow down your speedy departure!
"When the Chinese mortars begins to thuggin', the old Deuce Four begins to buggin' ")
Thursday, December 26, 2002
Our 2002 Christmas Letter
Alice and I both turned 60 this year and the maturity we now exhibit is in consonance with our years. More than at any other time in our lives, we are aware of the uniqueness of life and of the lives about us. We both lost our beloved stepmothers this year, Edna Dickinson in April and Ruth Combs in July, and several other good friends. And yet, life goes on, and our zest for and appreciation of it and of each other increases remarkably with our increasing age. Maybe life does begin at 60!
We enjoyed more travels this past year. We spent last New Year's with great friends in Playa del Carmen and were entertained and educated by visits to Mayan pyramids and temples, Mexican villages, and snorkeling in the warm, clear waters of the Gulf of Mexico. In June we went to Denver for the 90th birthday celebration of Alice’s Aunt Ruth, and visits with relatives, many living in the Denver area, and many who came from afar to celebrate.
In further reflection on year 2002, like Yogi said, it's deja vu all over again. Alice has been remodeling a house we bought that is just behind our present home. Remodeling a home was the way we started life together in 1989, except then we lived in the house as work went on all about us. About this remodel, suffice it to say that it is taking twice as long, and costing twice as much, as we thought it would. Alice is loving every minute of it! Then in August we began an encore of the four-month bicycle trip we took to Europe four years ago, only this time we went for two months and spent almost the entire time in Scotland, with just a little time in Ireland and England. Early in the second week of our journey we had our hardest day on bikes ever. With our packs that averaged 65 pounds, we began a 32-mile ride from Ballater past Balmoral Castle (the Queen was there, I wonder if she saw us peddle by?) to the Spittal of Glenshee (you have to love Scottish place names). Halfway through the ride, we began a 10-mile steady climb to the 2,000 feet summit at Cairnwell Pass, riding into a headwind that got stronger as we climbed - the gusts at the summit exceeded 50 miles an hour, and at one point blew Alice right off her bike. We rode past the base of ski lifts at the summit, and then flew downhill for six miles to our bed and breakfast lodge. There we arrived just in time for dinner provided by “Angels” as Alice named the six young ladies who invited us to share the BBQ they prepared for a Bachelorette party.
At the end of our bike trip, we joined Alice's high school reunion group for a 60th birthday party and cruise from San Pedro with stops at San Diego, Ensenada, and Catalina island. Unfortunately, during the first night Alice thought she was having a heart attack, and when we arrived at San Diego she was rushed to the UCSD Medical Center. Tony Bennett may have “left his heart in San Francisco,” but Alice left her gallbladder and about 100 gallstones in San Diego.
During the year we exchanged visits with friends and relatives, celebrating birthdays, etc. In October, we arrived in Las Vegas too late to celebrate my eldest son Bruce’s 39th birthday, but in time to celebrate his wedding to Tobe the next day. We wish Bruce and Tobe, Bruce's teenage daughter Leaha, and Tobe’s three sons Brian, Kyle and Shane, all the best, especially if (when) Bruce’s Nevada National Guard Military Police unit is called up for active duty.
Monday, November 11, 2002
Hypocisy Is A Tradition Of The Left
Editor, Independent Coast Observer
I was tempted to accept Peter Lippman's offer of a "Mendonoma" truce, but have chosen not to, since there is still the matter of Mr. Lippman calling me a "hatemonger," and the fact that I still consider him a hypocrite, and a sincere one at that. Actually, based on the tortuous, Clintonesque attempts Mr. Lippman made to define his subjectivity as objectivity, and his odd statement that he and like-minded individuals "think touching and feeling are life and death issues," I thought he had already given up the fight.
The left certainly has, and in fact is in full retreat. Four out of five Americans, including over half the Democrats, are glad that George W. Bush, not Bill Clinton, is leading us in these perilous times. As Bill Clinton "dallianced" through the 90's, the bodies of American soldiers were dragged through streets in Somalia, the World Trade center was bombed in 1993, U. S. military personnel were bombed in Saudi Arabia in 1995 and 1996, two U. S. embassies were bombed in Africa in 1998, and the USS Cole was bombed in 2000. After each bombing, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. However, the only thing he did was have $66,000,000 worth of Tomahawk missiles raise some dust in Afghanistan and destroy a pharmaceutical factory and kill some night watchmen and cleaning ladies in Sudan. No follow-up on this missile strike was made, and much later we tacitly admitted that the Sudan strike was a mistake. If Bill Clinton had not felt the need to distract the public from embarrassing Monica revelations, he would not have made any response at all.
In his response to Alice and my letters, Mr. Lippman exhorted us to also help improve the lives of innocent children (and adults) in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. Alice and I concur totally with this wish, since their own oppressive governments inflict their misery on them, and we support and encourage the overthrow of their governments and their replacement by democracies. In fact, if all of the failed socialist governments in the world were replaced by democracies and capitalism, terrorism would die out as prosperity bloomed. The left would not like this. Soon the Peoples' Republic of Berkeley would be the only venue left where proud and unrepentant socialists could be studied.
The left continues to trumpet free speech and diversity, while championing the oppression of same at the University of California at Berkeley. There, the left demanded retractions, apologies, and "sensitivity" training when the student newspaper ran an advertisement against reparations for Blacks, and when a conservative student newspaper ran an editorial cartoon depicting the September 11 highjackers in Hell, instead of being serviced by 72 virgins at the right hand of Allah.
I conclude from the above that hypocrisy is a respected leftist tradition, and that Mr. Lippman is steadfastly following this tradition.
Alice and I thank him for commending us for our "ascendancy to the School Board." However, we are disappointed that a previous writer, Ms. Bullamore, did not provide the ICO a summary of the actions she and like-minded individuals took at the October 4 School Board meeting, where it was reported that volunteers were sought but not found. We trust that other service opportunities will arise, and that concerned citizens will then come forward.
I was tempted to accept Peter Lippman's offer of a "Mendonoma" truce, but have chosen not to, since there is still the matter of Mr. Lippman calling me a "hatemonger," and the fact that I still consider him a hypocrite, and a sincere one at that. Actually, based on the tortuous, Clintonesque attempts Mr. Lippman made to define his subjectivity as objectivity, and his odd statement that he and like-minded individuals "think touching and feeling are life and death issues," I thought he had already given up the fight.
The left certainly has, and in fact is in full retreat. Four out of five Americans, including over half the Democrats, are glad that George W. Bush, not Bill Clinton, is leading us in these perilous times. As Bill Clinton "dallianced" through the 90's, the bodies of American soldiers were dragged through streets in Somalia, the World Trade center was bombed in 1993, U. S. military personnel were bombed in Saudi Arabia in 1995 and 1996, two U. S. embassies were bombed in Africa in 1998, and the USS Cole was bombed in 2000. After each bombing, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished. However, the only thing he did was have $66,000,000 worth of Tomahawk missiles raise some dust in Afghanistan and destroy a pharmaceutical factory and kill some night watchmen and cleaning ladies in Sudan. No follow-up on this missile strike was made, and much later we tacitly admitted that the Sudan strike was a mistake. If Bill Clinton had not felt the need to distract the public from embarrassing Monica revelations, he would not have made any response at all.
In his response to Alice and my letters, Mr. Lippman exhorted us to also help improve the lives of innocent children (and adults) in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. Alice and I concur totally with this wish, since their own oppressive governments inflict their misery on them, and we support and encourage the overthrow of their governments and their replacement by democracies. In fact, if all of the failed socialist governments in the world were replaced by democracies and capitalism, terrorism would die out as prosperity bloomed. The left would not like this. Soon the Peoples' Republic of Berkeley would be the only venue left where proud and unrepentant socialists could be studied.
The left continues to trumpet free speech and diversity, while championing the oppression of same at the University of California at Berkeley. There, the left demanded retractions, apologies, and "sensitivity" training when the student newspaper ran an advertisement against reparations for Blacks, and when a conservative student newspaper ran an editorial cartoon depicting the September 11 highjackers in Hell, instead of being serviced by 72 virgins at the right hand of Allah.
I conclude from the above that hypocrisy is a respected leftist tradition, and that Mr. Lippman is steadfastly following this tradition.
Alice and I thank him for commending us for our "ascendancy to the School Board." However, we are disappointed that a previous writer, Ms. Bullamore, did not provide the ICO a summary of the actions she and like-minded individuals took at the October 4 School Board meeting, where it was reported that volunteers were sought but not found. We trust that other service opportunities will arise, and that concerned citizens will then come forward.
Friday, November 16, 2001
Caucasian Octogenarian Female Suicide Bombers?
Editor
Regarding Mr. Schwab’s comments (ICO, 11/9/01) concerning the dialogue which has developed over my letters, I would ask readers to remember that two suicide Arab bombers attacked the Cole just about a year ago, and that suicide bombers ply their trade almost daily in Israel. Why then would we not expect Arab suicide bombers to attack us? Apparently, many others share my view. In Time, Nov. 8 edition, concerning anthrax and the Sept. 11 attack, Time reports that “…the Federal Government was roundly criticized for its failure to imagine the worst.” I am sure that the “worst” was imagined, but nothing effective was done about it because of Arab sensitivities. Terrorist profiling would of course have included examining young Arab-looking males for possible weapons. Why else would we single them out?
I feel certain that Arab suicide bombing was anticipated because, for eight of my 21 years of Air Force service, I and thousands of others were involved in “war gaming,” basically anticipating an opponents courses of action and devising counters to them. Mr. Schwab’s statements only point to his ignorance of threat assessment and countermeasures development. His statement that: “Changing (to a less volatile jet) fuel would have rendered jets useless as incendiary bombs” was ludicrous. First, suicide terrorists would be satisfied to crash the jet and kill the passengers on board. Secondly, even the less volatile jet fuel burns, and the fires, not explosions, brought down the twin towers.
I was pleased by Ms. Harrison’s excellent reply to Mr. Henderson’s bizarre letter, and to see that it included a paragraph concerning the terrorist attacks on us that went unanswered on Bill Clinton’s sorry watch. The ICO editor had excised similar information from one of my previous letters, and it is wonderful to see that “truth will out.” Let’s roll!
Regarding Mr. Schwab’s comments (ICO, 11/9/01) concerning the dialogue which has developed over my letters, I would ask readers to remember that two suicide Arab bombers attacked the Cole just about a year ago, and that suicide bombers ply their trade almost daily in Israel. Why then would we not expect Arab suicide bombers to attack us? Apparently, many others share my view. In Time, Nov. 8 edition, concerning anthrax and the Sept. 11 attack, Time reports that “…the Federal Government was roundly criticized for its failure to imagine the worst.” I am sure that the “worst” was imagined, but nothing effective was done about it because of Arab sensitivities. Terrorist profiling would of course have included examining young Arab-looking males for possible weapons. Why else would we single them out?
I feel certain that Arab suicide bombing was anticipated because, for eight of my 21 years of Air Force service, I and thousands of others were involved in “war gaming,” basically anticipating an opponents courses of action and devising counters to them. Mr. Schwab’s statements only point to his ignorance of threat assessment and countermeasures development. His statement that: “Changing (to a less volatile jet) fuel would have rendered jets useless as incendiary bombs” was ludicrous. First, suicide terrorists would be satisfied to crash the jet and kill the passengers on board. Secondly, even the less volatile jet fuel burns, and the fires, not explosions, brought down the twin towers.
I was pleased by Ms. Harrison’s excellent reply to Mr. Henderson’s bizarre letter, and to see that it included a paragraph concerning the terrorist attacks on us that went unanswered on Bill Clinton’s sorry watch. The ICO editor had excised similar information from one of my previous letters, and it is wonderful to see that “truth will out.” Let’s roll!
Saturday, November 10, 2001
"No Namecalling" Writer Calls Me "Hatemonger"
Alice and I just returned from over two weeks in Kaua’i, and one of the first things I did was catch up on local activities by reading through the last three weeks of the ICO. I noticed in the September 21 ICO that a Mr. Lippman commented on my September 14 letter and ended by stating that “it is important for us to respect one another, hear each other out, and avoid ‘ad hominem’ arguments.” Earlier in his letter Mr. Lippman, who I never recall meeting, correctly mentioned that in the instance of air travel security that I support racial profiling. He also correctly stated that racial profiling would not protect us from the clean-cut Anglo racists among us who bomb churches. He then noted that a highly likely source of irrational violence is our subpopulation of hatemongers, and then identified me as one of them. Mr. Lippman, I am judgmental, and conservative, and a Republican, support School Choice, and am not politically correct (although political correctness is a form of judgmentalism), but I am not a hatemonger. Mr. Lippman, you then went on to purportedly read my mind, by saying that I would applaud an attack on an Indian Sikh. Mr. Lippman, you are a hypocrite, and you would do well to heed the advice you gave us all in your letter. It is intellectually dishonest, and a personal insult to me, to be called a hatemonger by you and for you to say that I would applaud bigoted violence. Do you frequently assign such low motives and attitudes to people about whom you are totally ignorant? Do you fall back on the bigot’s nostrum, “I know what people like you think.”
Mr. Silverstein then instructs me on freedom and what it means to be an American. Mr. Silverstein, I served in the United States Air Force, first in the enlisted ranks and then as an officer, for over 21 years to protect our freedoms. One of the freedoms I took an oath to defend was the freedom from attack “from enemies both foreign and domestic.” I did not take an oath to protect the freedom of those who are not United States citizens at the price of our security. Although I was retired six years when the Gulf War started, I placed myself on a voluntary Air Force recall roster in the hopes that I would be called up instead of someone with a young family. Alice still hasn’t forgiven me for exposing myself to possible danger and a certain drastic cut in pay. However, Mr. Silverstein, I believe that turning a blind eye to the terrorist threats from individuals who are not American citizens takes freedom from those of us who are.
In the September 28 ICO, Ms. Bullamore applauded Mr. Lippman and Mr. Silverstein, and noted erroneously that I am a member of the Point Arena School Board. Ms. Bullamore, the reason you did not meet me at the October 4 board meeting which, from your implied concerns I assume you attended, is that I am not yet a board member. Actually, Alice and I were unopposed for two positions on the board, and we both will begin our service soon. I applaud Ms. Bullamore’s suggestion that more of us should be attending school board meetings, and I heartily endorse it. As a graduate of both Point Arena Elementary and High Schools (1949-1960), I am keenly interested in helping both schools because I know that improving education in our public schools is the most valuable thing we can do to improve the lives of minority children and children from poor families. It worked for me, and Alice is a volunteer tutor who has worked tirelessly and invested a substantial sum of her time and our own money to improve the reading skills of several children. So Ms. Bullamore, we welcome your concern and your participation, and I am sure that you and others equally concerned will participate actively in school board and other volunteer programs. Maybe you or someone else will even oppose us for election.
Mr. Silverstein then instructs me on freedom and what it means to be an American. Mr. Silverstein, I served in the United States Air Force, first in the enlisted ranks and then as an officer, for over 21 years to protect our freedoms. One of the freedoms I took an oath to defend was the freedom from attack “from enemies both foreign and domestic.” I did not take an oath to protect the freedom of those who are not United States citizens at the price of our security. Although I was retired six years when the Gulf War started, I placed myself on a voluntary Air Force recall roster in the hopes that I would be called up instead of someone with a young family. Alice still hasn’t forgiven me for exposing myself to possible danger and a certain drastic cut in pay. However, Mr. Silverstein, I believe that turning a blind eye to the terrorist threats from individuals who are not American citizens takes freedom from those of us who are.
In the September 28 ICO, Ms. Bullamore applauded Mr. Lippman and Mr. Silverstein, and noted erroneously that I am a member of the Point Arena School Board. Ms. Bullamore, the reason you did not meet me at the October 4 board meeting which, from your implied concerns I assume you attended, is that I am not yet a board member. Actually, Alice and I were unopposed for two positions on the board, and we both will begin our service soon. I applaud Ms. Bullamore’s suggestion that more of us should be attending school board meetings, and I heartily endorse it. As a graduate of both Point Arena Elementary and High Schools (1949-1960), I am keenly interested in helping both schools because I know that improving education in our public schools is the most valuable thing we can do to improve the lives of minority children and children from poor families. It worked for me, and Alice is a volunteer tutor who has worked tirelessly and invested a substantial sum of her time and our own money to improve the reading skills of several children. So Ms. Bullamore, we welcome your concern and your participation, and I am sure that you and others equally concerned will participate actively in school board and other volunteer programs. Maybe you or someone else will even oppose us for election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)