Random Thoughts

I read recently of a new Gallup Poll that said that more Americans were identifying themselves as "Pro-Life) (the story on Yahoo News is here). What are the implications of this with what is an apparent shift in the country's belief in the issue of Abortion? Why is it that Liberals who jump on the chance to list public opinion as a reason for change are not embracing this poll as evidence that the extreme position on abortion should be reconsidered? For example – Liberals list all the support for gay marriage as a reason for this social change to be adopted – why not apply the same standard to what seems to be a shift toward the pro-life position?

Why isn't the opposite of pro-life pro-death?

Gas prices are steadily rising – a recent story on the Fox Boston website notes that gas is "up 9 cents from last week and 34 cents over the last month." And that gas has risen for seven straight weeks. Why isn't the public clamoring for Obama's intervention the way they were for Bush's back when gas prices were on the rise? Why no investigations into "big oil" and their profits?

WBZ radio has a story that is entitled "Bill would let MA doctors say "I'm sorry"". It is interesting that in this day and age, medical staff are so worried about litigation (medical malpractice lawsuits) that they are refraining from offering condolences to patient's family members. The story states in part "Doctors have long expressed frustration that showing any compassion toward patients or their families - especially after a death following an operation or treatment - can be used against them in a medical malpractice lawsuit." Does anyone else see this as so very sad?

I was watching the news (I am not sure which one it was) but the local talking heads were discussing Obama's newest Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Sotomayor has stated in a speech that "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.". Does this woman realize what her role would be if she went to the Supreme Court? It would be to interpret the intent of the Constitution, not to apply her own specific empathy to a certain case. This is not a good pick.

Second thought about Sonia Sotomayor. I have heard again on news shows that Republicans are loath to vote against her because she is Hispanic and they do not want to alienate the Hispanic community. As Ann Coulter points out in her most recent column, Miguel Estrada (a Hispanic attorney) was nominated for a spot on the Federal Appeals court. Coulter notes that Estrada's nomination was blocked "…solely on the grounds that he is Hispanic and was likely headed for the Supreme Court -- according to Senate Democrat staff memos". Why weren't democrats worried about alienating the Hispanic community?

Final thought – why do the media feel that Hispanic community is so tightly vested in the fate (or future) of Sonia Sotomayor? Is the potential of her not being named to the Supreme Court somehow ratchet back race relations to some bygone era? This is identity politics at its worst.

Outspoken Roman

 

Bias in testing...???

The local Boston Fox Website has a story that "3 minority teachers
allege bias in test". Here in liberal Massachusetts that will have everyone a twitter I am sure. But in looking at the story, the alleged bias consists of that claim that "...minorities and nonnative English speakers who take the test fail the communication and literacy section at higher rates than whites and native English speakers."

So these potential teachers are failing the communication part? And instead of say working on communication skills, this group files a lawsuit claiming bias? What's next? How about I try out for the Red Sox, never having played professional sports and when I don't make it, claim there is a bias against me (non professional sports enthusiasts)? There is a set of basic skills I at least expect a teacher to have - communication would be up there in priority (along with the requisite educational background). I for one don't want any teacher teaching the next generation who fail what I am sure is basic communication requirements. I have heard teachers use improper English - "there's two of them for example" and feel if we continue to dilute some of the basic requirements for teachers, how can we not expect these not to be passed along to the kids they are teaching. I am all for minorities and non-natives being teachers (or whites or native Americans for that matter) but don't want to lower the bar for what we expect from this most important profession. This truly is a slippery slope that imperils America's future.

Outspoken Roman

Encouraging folks to "buy black"

This was news to me but probably not news to everyone but thought it was worth mentioning. Is anyone aware of the Empowerment Experiment?  Well in the words of the website, the Empowerment Experiment (EE) involves a black family (the Anderson Family) publicly committing to "Buy Black" for one year. In other words to only support black owned businesses.

Let me be clear - I have no problem with this. I often times go to a local store and spend extra to support local businesses (the other day I spent $1.19 for a .75 cent candy bar at a local snack stop) so for my part, I believe people should be able to spend their money where they see fit. What I don't want is the Government telling me I have to support black or white owned business or some quota system and feel that I should support businesses that give me the services I want. I was not for the smoking ban in restaurants as I thought it was needless Government intervention. Why not allow restaurants to cater to the smoking or non-smoking crowd. For my money, the non smoking restaurants would get the nod but why remove the ability to smoke in a restaurant?

My issue with the Empowerment Experiment is really a cultural one. What would the media say if white family vowed to buy only from white owned businesses? Would the media (CNN, Fox News, etc.) welcome the family that is white who have made a similar pledge (with the same motivations) to buy only from white businesses? If you go to the Empowerment Experiment website (http://www.eefortomorrow.com/) you can watch all the interviews the Andersons have given. I would bet there wouldn't be the same reaction, especially if the white family was from the "South" (can everyone say KKK?). I don't think I am wrong on this.

Good for the Andersons and don't I wish I lived in a country that I was assured to get similar reactions if I were to choose to do something along the same vein. I should be able to rent to whom I want, support who I want and spend my money how I see fit.

I wonder if the same people who are so ecstatic over the Andersons support the lawsuit brought on by a gay man against the website eharmony.com. Eharmony  is a dating service founded by religious Christians who have done a lot of research on what makes heterosexual dating successful and likely to lead to marriage. A gay man found that the site didn't offer man to man relationships so he sued. Like there aren't any other sites out there that offer gay singles some online match making. But eharmony capitulated - and in my opinion they shouldn't have. Why can't an online dating service offer up their services to clients of their choosing as opposed to being forced to amend their procedures against their wishes to include clientele (for whatever reason) they choose not to include? See this story on the Fox News website for more info.

The Andersons are free to do what they want with their money. The rest of the country should be so lucky.

Outspoken Roman

Obama's changing his mind - no surprise

Mona Charen writing on the National Review website notes subtle shifts in some of the ideals that supposedly carried Obama to the White House. Most interesting was the shift from Obama's Attorney General on the subject of holding terrorists. From a story on the LA Times website is a note that "... Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. during his confirmation hearing last month... agreed that the United States is at war with Al Qaeda and suggested the law of war allows the government to capture and hold alleged terrorists without charges."

Maybe the real world is catching up with the Obama administration which was so quick to cast dispersions on the Bush White House during the past election. I am sure this is not the last time the American people will see a shift in the conduct of the War on Terror away from what was promised toward what is a more realistic perspective.

I anxiously await the institution of 'coercive techniques' to gather intelligence from captured/suspected terrorists.

Outspoken Roman

Silliness from Massachusetts public health officials

WBZ reports that "Massachusetts public health officials are poised to vote on proposed rules that would require most restaurant chains to prominently display the calorie counts of their menu offerings". I am sure there are those out there that think this is the greatest news (similar to the people who thought that once Cigarettes posted warnings on their packages that the smoking problem would end and people would wise up). "Oh - smoking is bad for me...I didn't know that."

This continued Government big bureaucracy and oversight with little benefit. In my opinion no one who sits down to enjoy a Whopper or Big Mac thinks they are eating healthy and if the end goal is to make the public aware of how crappy fast food is, the increase in Fast Food sales with a corresponding increase in the public waistline is all the data that you need. French Fries, Chicken Nuggets and Pizza are just not as healthy as a salad. Is this news to anyone?

State officials should be more concerned with literacy and improving education (do not read this as raising better (liberal) children but rather having more children who can pass basic civics lessons). Focus on physical education and raising children who understand the freedoms that this country offers and the benefits of this republic, not how bad the burger chain cheeseburger and milkshake is.

Outspoken Roman

Judging by Race

I was sorry to read in the current news headlines over at WBZ a story with this headline "Latino group endorsement in race sparks criticism". The story notes in part that "A Latino political group is taking heat for not endorsing a Latina candidate running for the House seat vacated by former speaker Salvatore DiMasi."

I asked in an earlier post entitled "The persistence of racism?" :

What about the fact that "84% of black voters identify themselves as Obama supporters". Isn't this a little racist? Shouldn't the media do some investigating and ascertain why Obama has such a high level of support from the Black Community and why McCain does not? I am sure it is not due to race.

My point from that quote (to tie it to this WBZ story) is that the media don't assume that the support Obama enjoyed from the African American community was racist. It was expected that a high number of African Americans would support Obama (no one would ask why though)? I assume it is not based on the assumption that the African American population is not diverse in its thought. But doesn't it strike anyone strange that it is assumed that a segment of the population would support a candidate based solely on race? Why is it assumed in the WBZ story that all the Latino political group would support the Latino candidate based solely on race? What if the Latino candidate supports an end to affirmative action or is tough on immigration..should Oıste be expected to support that candidate if the candidate's individual beliefs run counter to the groups' goals?

We are making a lot of assumptions about race and getting on some slippery territory. For example, we didn't expect all the white people to vote for John McCain during the last election. Why do we expect any other 'group' to act any differently? I don't recall seeing a huge swell of support from the African American community when Clarence Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court. I don't think Alan Keyes got a lot of support nationwide either. Where was the media on these stories?

Finally, when are we going to remove our fascination with group or identity politics and live up to the ideals this country was founded on?

Outspoken Roman