A Hollywood legend passed away yesterday. If you passed him on the street, you’d probably never know it. If you heard his name, you’d probably say “Oh, yeah – umm, who?” But if you’ve been to a movie in the last thirty years or so, you know who I’m talking about.
Don LaFontaine died yesterday at the age of 68, as a result of complications from treatment for a lung-related illness. He started in the business as an audio engineer until 1965, when he got what turned out to be his big break. By the time he died, he was possibly the most prolific actor in Screen Actor Guild history, based on the number of signed contracts he had. Still haven’t got a clue, do you?
How can a guy have over 5000 appearances to his credit and yet be generally unrecognized in public? LaFontaine’s 5000 plus appearances aren’t in movies, per se, but in movie trailers. He’s the voice you’ve heard in so many movie trailers such as “Batman Begins”, “Terminator 2: Judgment Day”, “Dr. Strangelove”, and “Cast Away”. He was also heard on television, doing voiceover work for shows such as “Entertainment Tonight” and “The Insiders”, as well as the Academy Awards. His voice was used by every major network, as well as several cable stations. In 2006, he even parodied himself in a Geico Insurance commercial.
Don LaFontaine is survived by his wife and their three children.
Check on this video on YouTube about the life of Don LaFontaine.
If you liked that one, check out this comedian's take on LaFontaine's work.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Introducing Governor Sarah Palin and Child...and Child
On Friday, Republican presidential nominee John McCain surprised the political world when he announced his Vice Presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. In the few days since his announcement, Governor Palin’s life has been the target of great media scrutiny. As of now, we know a few things about her past – she’s married with four children, athletic, and a member of the National Rifle Association. She’s even a former first runner-up in the Miss Alaska beauty pageant. Much to the envy of politicians all across the country and all across the aisle, she currently enjoys an approval rating in the 80-90+ percent range. How many politicians would love to have that? On top of everything else, she’s tough, not afraid to make the hard decisions.
Much to the contrary of what you’ve heard in the news lately, Governor Palin is not just an “out of the blue” choice for a running mate. In fact, even to my surprise, there was scuttlebutt floating around many months ago that Palin would make an excellent choice. In spite of the fact that the Alaska governor’s name has been on the radar for some time, many in the media would seem to suggest that she’s “an unknown”.
One of the “surprise” topics the media seems to have latched onto today revolves around Governor Palin’s 17 year-old daughter, Bristol, who is herself five months pregnant. As the picture is being painted, the presidential race might just as well be conceded by the Republicans next week for being foolish and ignorant enough to believe that a running mate with a pregnant teenage daughter would be a good choice. They’re probably right.
Think about it. Isn’t it obvious how patently unqualified Governor Palin is? As governor of Alaska, when she’s considering whether or not to support a tax increase, wouldn’t the obvious tipping point in that debate revolve around whether or not Bristol Palin is an unwed pregnant teenager? When pondering her position on legislation which would impact the citizens of her state, wouldn’t the citizens expect her decision to revolve around the fact that her daughter is pregnant? If another oil tanker spill occurs off the coast of Alaska, wouldn’t the cleanup effort have to be coordinated with Bristol’s appointment for an ultrasound at her OB/GYN’s office? If you answered “Yes” to any of these questions, please follow these simple instructions:
1. Remove your voter’s registration card from your wallet/purse.
-- If you don’t have a voter’s registration card or a wallet/purse, skip to Step #3
2. Burn the aforementioned voter’s registration card
3. Contact your employer and quit your job
-- If you don’t have a job, you probably should be doing something more important than reading this blog, like LOOKING FOR A J-O-B!!
4. Set out in search of your village. You know the one I’m referring to – the one that’s missing their idiot!
5. (And this one's the most important...) Never, EVER vote for anyone or anything.
Let’s be realistic. Governor Palin is doing what any mother should do in this situation. She’s standing by and supporting her daughter. Being that Governor Palin is strongly anti-abortion, she’s demonstrating that she can walk the walk.
Consider a few things.
-- Who among us has children that have never, EVER made a terrible mistake without first considering the potential results of their actions?
-- Who among us have, ourselves, never, EVER made a terrible mistake without first considering the results of our own actions?
-- For those who raised their hands to both of the previous questions, the final question is what color is the sky in the imaginary world in which you live?
For those who argue that this girl is too young to have to deal with this much pressure, she’s about to have a child. Parenting and all of the responsibilities that come with it can be the greatest pressures anyone can have to deal with. As Sarah Palin has explained to her daughter, it’s time for her to grow up and face her impending adulthood. A further thought -- which would be more pressure for her to deal with: having to deal with a pregnancy in the public spotlight, or having to deal with the fact that her mother had to give up a chance at being Vice President of the United States, all because of her?
It’s interesting that so many are focused on the age of this “child”. What makes it interesting is that we live in a society where children younger than her make their way through our judicial system every day – the ADULT judicial system, charged with crimes like armed robbery and murder. This 17 year-old, is just a kid, though. Yeah - that makes sense.
Ultimately, this is a non-issue. It’s certainly not a concern of the political campaigns. Bristol’s pregnancy has no bearing on whether or not her mother will make an effective Vice President, or potential President. Even Senator Obama’s campaign has denounced the story, stating that candidate’s families are off limits to such reporting. When both presidential candidates are saying it’s not a problem, why is anyone else whining about it? Maybe the media needs to cover something far more newsworthy -- like whether or not someone remember to change the toilet tissue rolls aboard Air Force One.
Much to the contrary of what you’ve heard in the news lately, Governor Palin is not just an “out of the blue” choice for a running mate. In fact, even to my surprise, there was scuttlebutt floating around many months ago that Palin would make an excellent choice. In spite of the fact that the Alaska governor’s name has been on the radar for some time, many in the media would seem to suggest that she’s “an unknown”.
One of the “surprise” topics the media seems to have latched onto today revolves around Governor Palin’s 17 year-old daughter, Bristol, who is herself five months pregnant. As the picture is being painted, the presidential race might just as well be conceded by the Republicans next week for being foolish and ignorant enough to believe that a running mate with a pregnant teenage daughter would be a good choice. They’re probably right.
Think about it. Isn’t it obvious how patently unqualified Governor Palin is? As governor of Alaska, when she’s considering whether or not to support a tax increase, wouldn’t the obvious tipping point in that debate revolve around whether or not Bristol Palin is an unwed pregnant teenager? When pondering her position on legislation which would impact the citizens of her state, wouldn’t the citizens expect her decision to revolve around the fact that her daughter is pregnant? If another oil tanker spill occurs off the coast of Alaska, wouldn’t the cleanup effort have to be coordinated with Bristol’s appointment for an ultrasound at her OB/GYN’s office? If you answered “Yes” to any of these questions, please follow these simple instructions:
1. Remove your voter’s registration card from your wallet/purse.
-- If you don’t have a voter’s registration card or a wallet/purse, skip to Step #3
2. Burn the aforementioned voter’s registration card
3. Contact your employer and quit your job
-- If you don’t have a job, you probably should be doing something more important than reading this blog, like LOOKING FOR A J-O-B!!
4. Set out in search of your village. You know the one I’m referring to – the one that’s missing their idiot!
5. (And this one's the most important...) Never, EVER vote for anyone or anything.
Let’s be realistic. Governor Palin is doing what any mother should do in this situation. She’s standing by and supporting her daughter. Being that Governor Palin is strongly anti-abortion, she’s demonstrating that she can walk the walk.
Consider a few things.
-- Who among us has children that have never, EVER made a terrible mistake without first considering the potential results of their actions?
-- Who among us have, ourselves, never, EVER made a terrible mistake without first considering the results of our own actions?
-- For those who raised their hands to both of the previous questions, the final question is what color is the sky in the imaginary world in which you live?
For those who argue that this girl is too young to have to deal with this much pressure, she’s about to have a child. Parenting and all of the responsibilities that come with it can be the greatest pressures anyone can have to deal with. As Sarah Palin has explained to her daughter, it’s time for her to grow up and face her impending adulthood. A further thought -- which would be more pressure for her to deal with: having to deal with a pregnancy in the public spotlight, or having to deal with the fact that her mother had to give up a chance at being Vice President of the United States, all because of her?
It’s interesting that so many are focused on the age of this “child”. What makes it interesting is that we live in a society where children younger than her make their way through our judicial system every day – the ADULT judicial system, charged with crimes like armed robbery and murder. This 17 year-old, is just a kid, though. Yeah - that makes sense.
Ultimately, this is a non-issue. It’s certainly not a concern of the political campaigns. Bristol’s pregnancy has no bearing on whether or not her mother will make an effective Vice President, or potential President. Even Senator Obama’s campaign has denounced the story, stating that candidate’s families are off limits to such reporting. When both presidential candidates are saying it’s not a problem, why is anyone else whining about it? Maybe the media needs to cover something far more newsworthy -- like whether or not someone remember to change the toilet tissue rolls aboard Air Force One.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
November is fast approaching
Hey, folks, November will be on us before we know it, and we all know what that means. Time to vote! Time to select the people who will represent us in our government. Are you registered?
After years of sitting on the sidelines, I was finally motivated to register to vote. This won’t be the first time I’ve voted, but admittedly it has been a while since I did. With the possibility that Barack Obama might actually be elected to run this country, and in a sense, the rest of the world, I felt the need to register, so Marsha and I went down to the county courthouse last week and did our civic duty.
I’ve come to realize that there’s a price to pay before one can truly be allowed to complain about what’s happening in government. The price for that is voting for our representatives. You have to speak your mind. If you don’t, you shouldn’t complain. After all, you had the opportunity to change the situation. If you didn’t take that opportunity, then you get to shut your pie hole when our representatives don’t do what we expect them to do.
It’s amazing, really. You hear after every election about low voter turnouts. It always seems to surprise us, because during the campaigns, we’re told over and over about how many people in the area are registered to vote. Yet, when the votes are tallied, the figures seem to reflect how few people got out to the polls. Now, we know that the number of “registered voters” isn’t really an exact figure. Some of those people have moved out of the area. Some have been incarcerated. Others have simply died. When you account for all of those demographics, you still have a sizable group of people, most of whom ultimately didn’t go vote. Why do you suppose that is?
One of the most prevalent excuses appears to be “My one vote doesn’t count”. I used to believe that myself. Over the past few years, I’ve come to eat those words. In the local elections, Angela Tuttle, 32, was elected constable in Hancock County, TN. Her father, a former constable himself, encouraged Angela to write her name in as candidate for the open position. Angela won the election by one vote – her own, which turned out to be the ONLY vote cast. Turns out no one else ran for the position.
On a more serious note, too many people think their vote doesn’t count. When you picture your one vote compared to the thousands or millions voting in any given election, it can seem that one vote wouldn’t matter one way or another. But, if enough people stay home with that kind of thinking we end up with what we’ve always had – a “good ole boy” network of people who continue on in office term after term. Take for example, former Knoxville, TN, mayor Victor Ashe. When he was first elected, Ashe seemed to be a true man of the people, a man ready to answer the call when the constituents needed him. By the time the third of his unprecedented four terms came about, he had become a very large cog in a system that listened to few and worked for even fewer. He and several members of the city council pretty well worked to benefit themselves and a few of their more financially fortunate contributors. It was only the passage of term limits which finally freed Knoxville from the grip of Ashe and his cronies on the city council, since so many of those who complained never actually showed up at the polls to voice their dissatisfaction in the form of a vote for the other guy.
Another excuse is “I don’t like anyone who’s running”. Often times, we’re forced to pick the lesser of two evils in an election. Such seems to be the situation in this year’s presidential election.
One the one hand, Barack Obama isn’t exactly well liked, due to his lack of experience in federal government. The fact is it wasn’t too long ago Obama was a small time politician in Chicago who no one had ever heard of on the national level. The fact of the matter is, 2008 was supposed to be Obama’s “Coming Out” party, of sorts – get his name out there, so when 2012 rolls around, he wouldn’t be a complete unknown. It was assumed that Hillary Clinton would actually be the Democrats nominee this year. Instead, they’ve got Obama.
On the other hand, we have John McCain. A seasoned, experienced politician to be certain, but not really the one the Republicans were hoping for either. It seems that many Republicans would have been far happier with Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney as a candidate. McCain is viewed by some as merely a continuation of Bush’s policies – effectively, George W. Bush’s “third term”.
In the end, it’s still the responsibility of each registered voter to make a decision on who they want, even if the one they’re voting for isn’t exactly their first choice. Not only do they have to make a decision, they need to make an INFORMED decision, which brings us to our third excuse, “I don’t know who to vote for because I don’t know where the candidates stand on the issues”. Be informed, people! Don’t just sit around watching the latest installment of “American Idol” or “The Bachelor”. Some of these people who are running for office will actually be elected. Do you want to be the one who just picked someone for the sake of saying you voted? Just your luck, you’ll have ended up helping to elect the guy who stands for everything you’re against. If you’re not going to pay attention to who you’re voting for, you might as well not vote at all. At least, then you don’t run the risk of electing the guy who’s a complete idiot, as opposed to the one who may be just a partial idiot.
And remember the difference between an ignoramus and a gross ignoramus. A gross ignoramus is 144 times worse!
Okay, folks, enough from the Great Soapbox. Those of you who aren’t registered to vote – get registered – NOW! Time is running out to be registered in time to be eligible to vote in the November elections. Those of you already registered – get to the polls. And don’t try the fourth excuse – “I couldn’t get off from work”. The law REQUIRES your employer to make reasonable accommodations to allow you sufficient time off to vote in your home precinct. Now, for some, that will mean you will, in fact, have to leave work, go vote, and then return to work. Sorry, folks. Do what you have to do. And, in the process, if you can find anyone to vote for who supports the Fair Tax Initiative, VOTE FOR THEM – they are your friends!!
After years of sitting on the sidelines, I was finally motivated to register to vote. This won’t be the first time I’ve voted, but admittedly it has been a while since I did. With the possibility that Barack Obama might actually be elected to run this country, and in a sense, the rest of the world, I felt the need to register, so Marsha and I went down to the county courthouse last week and did our civic duty.
I’ve come to realize that there’s a price to pay before one can truly be allowed to complain about what’s happening in government. The price for that is voting for our representatives. You have to speak your mind. If you don’t, you shouldn’t complain. After all, you had the opportunity to change the situation. If you didn’t take that opportunity, then you get to shut your pie hole when our representatives don’t do what we expect them to do.
It’s amazing, really. You hear after every election about low voter turnouts. It always seems to surprise us, because during the campaigns, we’re told over and over about how many people in the area are registered to vote. Yet, when the votes are tallied, the figures seem to reflect how few people got out to the polls. Now, we know that the number of “registered voters” isn’t really an exact figure. Some of those people have moved out of the area. Some have been incarcerated. Others have simply died. When you account for all of those demographics, you still have a sizable group of people, most of whom ultimately didn’t go vote. Why do you suppose that is?
One of the most prevalent excuses appears to be “My one vote doesn’t count”. I used to believe that myself. Over the past few years, I’ve come to eat those words. In the local elections, Angela Tuttle, 32, was elected constable in Hancock County, TN. Her father, a former constable himself, encouraged Angela to write her name in as candidate for the open position. Angela won the election by one vote – her own, which turned out to be the ONLY vote cast. Turns out no one else ran for the position.
On a more serious note, too many people think their vote doesn’t count. When you picture your one vote compared to the thousands or millions voting in any given election, it can seem that one vote wouldn’t matter one way or another. But, if enough people stay home with that kind of thinking we end up with what we’ve always had – a “good ole boy” network of people who continue on in office term after term. Take for example, former Knoxville, TN, mayor Victor Ashe. When he was first elected, Ashe seemed to be a true man of the people, a man ready to answer the call when the constituents needed him. By the time the third of his unprecedented four terms came about, he had become a very large cog in a system that listened to few and worked for even fewer. He and several members of the city council pretty well worked to benefit themselves and a few of their more financially fortunate contributors. It was only the passage of term limits which finally freed Knoxville from the grip of Ashe and his cronies on the city council, since so many of those who complained never actually showed up at the polls to voice their dissatisfaction in the form of a vote for the other guy.
Another excuse is “I don’t like anyone who’s running”. Often times, we’re forced to pick the lesser of two evils in an election. Such seems to be the situation in this year’s presidential election.
One the one hand, Barack Obama isn’t exactly well liked, due to his lack of experience in federal government. The fact is it wasn’t too long ago Obama was a small time politician in Chicago who no one had ever heard of on the national level. The fact of the matter is, 2008 was supposed to be Obama’s “Coming Out” party, of sorts – get his name out there, so when 2012 rolls around, he wouldn’t be a complete unknown. It was assumed that Hillary Clinton would actually be the Democrats nominee this year. Instead, they’ve got Obama.
On the other hand, we have John McCain. A seasoned, experienced politician to be certain, but not really the one the Republicans were hoping for either. It seems that many Republicans would have been far happier with Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, or Mitt Romney as a candidate. McCain is viewed by some as merely a continuation of Bush’s policies – effectively, George W. Bush’s “third term”.
In the end, it’s still the responsibility of each registered voter to make a decision on who they want, even if the one they’re voting for isn’t exactly their first choice. Not only do they have to make a decision, they need to make an INFORMED decision, which brings us to our third excuse, “I don’t know who to vote for because I don’t know where the candidates stand on the issues”. Be informed, people! Don’t just sit around watching the latest installment of “American Idol” or “The Bachelor”. Some of these people who are running for office will actually be elected. Do you want to be the one who just picked someone for the sake of saying you voted? Just your luck, you’ll have ended up helping to elect the guy who stands for everything you’re against. If you’re not going to pay attention to who you’re voting for, you might as well not vote at all. At least, then you don’t run the risk of electing the guy who’s a complete idiot, as opposed to the one who may be just a partial idiot.
And remember the difference between an ignoramus and a gross ignoramus. A gross ignoramus is 144 times worse!
Okay, folks, enough from the Great Soapbox. Those of you who aren’t registered to vote – get registered – NOW! Time is running out to be registered in time to be eligible to vote in the November elections. Those of you already registered – get to the polls. And don’t try the fourth excuse – “I couldn’t get off from work”. The law REQUIRES your employer to make reasonable accommodations to allow you sufficient time off to vote in your home precinct. Now, for some, that will mean you will, in fact, have to leave work, go vote, and then return to work. Sorry, folks. Do what you have to do. And, in the process, if you can find anyone to vote for who supports the Fair Tax Initiative, VOTE FOR THEM – they are your friends!!
Friday, July 25, 2008
Barack -- ON TOUR!! Get your tickets now!!
In the news today, apparent Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama is touring around Europe. Touring – that’s a good word for it. Yesterday, he gave a speech in Berlin. What did he have to say? Was it insightful? Will it have a great impact on the world? Was it well-received by the German citizens? Does any of that matter? Absolutely – NOT!
Let’s ask the real relevant question – what was Barack Obama doing in Berlin giving a speech in the first place? Many have criticized Obama as being a highly inexperienced candidate; that he lacks foreign policy experience. Ok, so he hops a plane to Europe to talk to the various world leaders. That doesn’t involve making speeches covered by global media, nor having the nightly news anchors from the three major networks in tow. That simply involves sitting down and talking to the foreign leaders. Instead, Obama makes the news giving a speech in Berlin. Now, let’s look at why that’s a problem.
First of all, Barack is touring around Europe. Yes, back to that “touring” word again. As I said earlier, that’s a good word for what he does. He travels around from state to state, nation to nation, like a rock-star on a world tour. There’s a good analogy. See, like a rock-star, Barack is glad to take money from his screaming (and in some cases, fainting) fans and give them what they want to hear. In the end, it’s all just the same fluff to a slightly different tune.
Secondly, why is he giving a speech to the Germans, the French, or anyone else outside of America for that matter? Last time I checked, the citizens of Europe don’t actually get to vote for the AMERICAN president. It doesn’t matter one teeny, tiny, little bit what they think. The entire European community can back Obama for president and bring the Asians and Africans along with them for the ride. All put together, they still get exactly zero votes in OUR election. Essentially, it’s nothing more than propaganda. It’s just an opportunity to get Barack Obama in the news yet again, without actually doing or saying anything particularly important. It’s a good thing that the media in this country isn’t liberally biased or anything, because then it might look like they were playing favorites instead of being the fair, unbiased purveyors of information that we all know them to be.
Finally, aren’t Obama and/or the Democratic Party putting the cart before the horse? At this point, Barack Obama hasn’t even been officially selected as the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, let alone actually elected to the office. Isn’t that part kind of important? Before one goes gallivanting around the world like he’s the president, shouldn’t he actually have the job first? Oh, right, sorry – that’s just another “distraction” from the Obama campaign. In other words, it’s not important because Obama doesn’t want to have to answer questions about it, as the answers might lead his followers to believe that he isn’t the “messiah” that some have proclaimed him to be.
“The Messiah”. Many have called Barack Obama by that name. In Aramaic, the word messiah literally means “the anointed one”. The Hebrew use of the word refers to Jesus Christ. I would hardly compare Barack Obama to Jesus Christ. While I’ve never personally been privileged and honored to be standing face to face with the corporeal form of the Lord, I truly believe that if I were to experience that, I wouldn’t have an irresistible compulsion to check my back pocket to see if my wallet was still there when I was done. Let’s get something straight, people. Barack Obama is not the Messiah. There is exactly one Messiah in the world. That’s Jesus Christ. None came before him; none shall come after. Exactly one. No more, no less. To use that word to describe any mortal man is disrespectful, in my opinion. Now, let’s stop for a minute, take a breath. Where does all of this talk to Barack Obama being the new messiah come from in the first place? Well, I have an idea on that. If you’ve been reading my blogs, you knew I would.
In his book, “The Third Reich, A Revolution of Ideological Inhumanity, Volume I: The Power of Perception”, Everette O Lemons talks about the plan of the Nazis to use propaganda to capture the hearts and minds of the German youth. In much the same way, Barack Obama has been targeting the youth of America. He’s focusing on young, college-age, first-time voters. These are young folks who have, for years, listened as their parents have said that we need “a change” in America. In most cases, their parents have never really defined what “change” was needed. Obama is capitalizing on that oversight. He runs about using the magic word “change” and the youth of America are flocking to him like moths to a flame. Here is their messiah, their anointed one, their savior. He'll help them. He’ll change everything that’s wrong with the world. They think by electing Barack Obama in November, they will finally bring about the “change” their parents have been pleading for, and won't their parents be so very proud of them? When they think about voting for Obama, they might want to remember that old saying…be careful what you wish for – you may get it!
Let’s take a minute to educate the youth of America. Here’s their first opportunity to make their voices heard. Before they step into that voting booth, they need to know who and what they are voting for. If someone is promising change, what exactly does that mean? What kind of change? Who benefits from that change, other than Barack and his followers, that is? Who is going to be harmed by that change? Be smart, people. Think. THINK! Use your head. Doesn't Barack seem a little too good to be true? When things seem like they're too good to be true, they usually are.
Let’s ask the real relevant question – what was Barack Obama doing in Berlin giving a speech in the first place? Many have criticized Obama as being a highly inexperienced candidate; that he lacks foreign policy experience. Ok, so he hops a plane to Europe to talk to the various world leaders. That doesn’t involve making speeches covered by global media, nor having the nightly news anchors from the three major networks in tow. That simply involves sitting down and talking to the foreign leaders. Instead, Obama makes the news giving a speech in Berlin. Now, let’s look at why that’s a problem.
First of all, Barack is touring around Europe. Yes, back to that “touring” word again. As I said earlier, that’s a good word for what he does. He travels around from state to state, nation to nation, like a rock-star on a world tour. There’s a good analogy. See, like a rock-star, Barack is glad to take money from his screaming (and in some cases, fainting) fans and give them what they want to hear. In the end, it’s all just the same fluff to a slightly different tune.
Secondly, why is he giving a speech to the Germans, the French, or anyone else outside of America for that matter? Last time I checked, the citizens of Europe don’t actually get to vote for the AMERICAN president. It doesn’t matter one teeny, tiny, little bit what they think. The entire European community can back Obama for president and bring the Asians and Africans along with them for the ride. All put together, they still get exactly zero votes in OUR election. Essentially, it’s nothing more than propaganda. It’s just an opportunity to get Barack Obama in the news yet again, without actually doing or saying anything particularly important. It’s a good thing that the media in this country isn’t liberally biased or anything, because then it might look like they were playing favorites instead of being the fair, unbiased purveyors of information that we all know them to be.
Finally, aren’t Obama and/or the Democratic Party putting the cart before the horse? At this point, Barack Obama hasn’t even been officially selected as the Democratic Party’s nominee for president, let alone actually elected to the office. Isn’t that part kind of important? Before one goes gallivanting around the world like he’s the president, shouldn’t he actually have the job first? Oh, right, sorry – that’s just another “distraction” from the Obama campaign. In other words, it’s not important because Obama doesn’t want to have to answer questions about it, as the answers might lead his followers to believe that he isn’t the “messiah” that some have proclaimed him to be.
“The Messiah”. Many have called Barack Obama by that name. In Aramaic, the word messiah literally means “the anointed one”. The Hebrew use of the word refers to Jesus Christ. I would hardly compare Barack Obama to Jesus Christ. While I’ve never personally been privileged and honored to be standing face to face with the corporeal form of the Lord, I truly believe that if I were to experience that, I wouldn’t have an irresistible compulsion to check my back pocket to see if my wallet was still there when I was done. Let’s get something straight, people. Barack Obama is not the Messiah. There is exactly one Messiah in the world. That’s Jesus Christ. None came before him; none shall come after. Exactly one. No more, no less. To use that word to describe any mortal man is disrespectful, in my opinion. Now, let’s stop for a minute, take a breath. Where does all of this talk to Barack Obama being the new messiah come from in the first place? Well, I have an idea on that. If you’ve been reading my blogs, you knew I would.
In his book, “The Third Reich, A Revolution of Ideological Inhumanity, Volume I: The Power of Perception”, Everette O Lemons talks about the plan of the Nazis to use propaganda to capture the hearts and minds of the German youth. In much the same way, Barack Obama has been targeting the youth of America. He’s focusing on young, college-age, first-time voters. These are young folks who have, for years, listened as their parents have said that we need “a change” in America. In most cases, their parents have never really defined what “change” was needed. Obama is capitalizing on that oversight. He runs about using the magic word “change” and the youth of America are flocking to him like moths to a flame. Here is their messiah, their anointed one, their savior. He'll help them. He’ll change everything that’s wrong with the world. They think by electing Barack Obama in November, they will finally bring about the “change” their parents have been pleading for, and won't their parents be so very proud of them? When they think about voting for Obama, they might want to remember that old saying…be careful what you wish for – you may get it!
Let’s take a minute to educate the youth of America. Here’s their first opportunity to make their voices heard. Before they step into that voting booth, they need to know who and what they are voting for. If someone is promising change, what exactly does that mean? What kind of change? Who benefits from that change, other than Barack and his followers, that is? Who is going to be harmed by that change? Be smart, people. Think. THINK! Use your head. Doesn't Barack seem a little too good to be true? When things seem like they're too good to be true, they usually are.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Parents, don't worry...
Parents, don't worry about your kids when the go to college. Rest assured that your children will be getting the best education your money or their student loans & scholarships can buy. The best part is, after four (OK, maybe five or six) years, the hard work, discipline, and dedication will all be rewarded with a degree, backed up by the knowledge that everything they've learned in their classes is the most recent, up-to-date, factual information that the professors could find. To quote the great comedian and storyteller Bill Cosby, "Right!"
Like the rest of the educational system in America, even our colleges and universities are directed by their share of internal politics. Often, these politics are not originating in the offices of university presidents and deans. Instead, at times, the system appears to be essentially run by the professors, while the administrators sit idly by, cowering in the corner. Is that how you think your hard-earned tuition dollars are being spent?
One of the problems in the system involves instructors who teach classes not to educate and inform, but to indoctrinate and push their own personal or political agendas. One example of this is demonstrated by professors who twist and, in cases, revise history in an attempt to convey their own agendas. Facts take a back seat to that end. Their ultimately irrelevant to some. Is this how you want your children to spend their time and your money (or theirs)?
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying all college professors are full of crap. In fact, I believe the majority of them to be staying on topic and within the historical facts. Like everyone else on this planet, these instructors have their own beliefs on politics, religion, economics, etc. Also, like most of us, they can easily do our jobs without letting those personal beliefs interfere with their jobs. But what happens when an instructor dismisses accepted historical facts in an effort to promote an ideology all their own?
A link in "Nealz Nuze", on the website of nationally syndicated talk show host Neal Boortz, led me to this article by George Leef on the website for the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy. I found it very interesting. As a short-term college student at the University of Tennessee over fifteen years ago, I had heard this sort of thing went on in some classes, although I was fortunate enough not to be subjected to such indoctrination disguised as education. Read the article and see what happened when a professor at Wellesley College tries to take a fellow professor to task for relating factually unsound information to students in his classes.
Thank you to Mr. Leef for giving me permission to repost this well written and eye-opening article.
Clarion Call
How Truth Lost Out to Political Correctness at Wellesley
A professor describes her bitter experience defending historical fact over mythical Afrocentrism claims.
By George Leef
June 11, 2008
Are professors in American colleges and universities interested in the truth? That sounds like a strange question, but in an extremely revealing new book, Mary Lefkowitz shows that there are some who won’t let the truth get in the way of their efforts at indoctrinating students. Worse yet, administrators often cave in to these academic bullies rather than standing up for faculty members with the nerve to question them.
Lefkowitz is an emeritus professor at Wellesley College, where she taught courses on classical culture for many years. Ancient Greece is her specialty. It is hard to imagine that such a quiet scholar would become the center of a vehement controversy that would rock the campus and descend (on one side) to the level of vicious personal attacks. History Lesson (Yale University Press, 202 pages) is the story of her bitter experience after challenging the accuracy of material a professor in Wellesley’s Africana Studies Department used in his classes.
In her introduction Lefkowitz writes, “Telling the truth, instead of being our first responsibility, has suddenly become less important than achieving social goals. These goals were to be reached not by means of the usual scholarly tools of reflection and reasoned persuasion. They were to be imposed by assertion and fiat.”
One of those “social goals” that now dominate in American education is that of making various minority groups (those designated as victims of our oppressive culture) feel good about themselves. Toward that end, some professors have taken to the creation of myths. The particular myth that plays the central role in this drama is that of the “Stolen Legacy.”
Here is the way that myth goes. The culture and philosophy of the ancient Greeks was not truly their creation, but was “stolen” from Egypt. Since Egypt is in Africa and all the people in Africa are “black” this means that white Europeans were victimizing blacks more than 2400 years ago. In one particularly ludicrous aspect of this myth, it is asserted that Aristotle journeyed to the Library at Alexandria and stole books that he later claimed as his own works.
When Professor Lefkowitz learned that this and other intellectually indefensible ideas were being taught by a professor (Tony Martin) in the Africana Studies Department, she publicly challenged their historical accuracy. Among other problems with the “stolen legacy” idea is that Aristotle died years before the Library at Alexandria was built. But when she pointed this fact out to Professor Martin, he took umbrage. Who was she, a white Jew, to question his interpretation of black history?! At that point, it began to occur to her that Martin, a tenured faculty member, was one of those people who won’t let the truth get in the way of achieving their objectives.
More disturbing yet, she discovered that the dean of the college would not intervene. Quoth the dean, “He has his view of ancient history and you have yours.” Throughout the confrontation between Martin and Lefkowitz, the Wellesley administrators were cowering, spineless creatures—much like the Duke administration during the infamous lacrosse case in 2006.
Looking further into the curriculum in Martin’s department, Lefkowitz discovered that students were assigned a book entitled The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, an anonymous book published by the Nation of Islam. While masquerading as a work of scholarship, complete with 1,275 footnotes, it is a screed that seeks to promote the idea that Jews were mainly responsible for slavery. The book is hate literature with a thin veneer of sophistication. Using it in a college course is deeply troubling. The Wellesley administration, however, ducked behind the curtain of professors’ “academic freedom” when it was brought to their attention.
Lefkowitz’s purely academic criticisms of the materials being used to teach Wellesley students elicited an outrageous counter-attack by Martin, a book entitled The Jewish Onslaught: Dispatches from the Wellesley Battlefront. In it, Martin depicted himself as a hero standing strong for “black progress” against the evil oppressor class (the Jews) and craven blacks who didn’t go along with his racial harangues (such as Wellesley economics professor Marcellus Andrews and Harvard historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr.).
Martin wasn’t done yet. Next he filed a lawsuit against Lefkowitz claiming that an article she had written slandered him. The article was about an incident in 1991 where Martin had verbally abused a female student. His suit alleged that the article contained erroneous material that had damaged him professionally. Naturally, Wellesley’s administration refused to defend Lefkowitz. She was able to find expert legal help, however, through the Anti-Defamation League. The case dragged on until 1999, when it was finally dismissed.
One of the hot topics in higher education these days is whether there is a significant problem of professors turning their classes into indoctrination camps. We often hear from defenders of the status quo that instances of this are mostly made up or exaggerated, and that in any event, American students are “critical thinkers” who are too bright accept any propaganda that might happen to make its way to their ears. History Lesson refutes both parts of that defense. Martin clearly meant to indoctrinate his students with historical falsehoods, and from the letters and comments of his students about the controversy, it’s evident that many of them had swallowed his line completely. To them, Lefkowitz was an enemy just as to Mao’s Red Brigades any intellectual was an enemy. If you’ve heard that American college students are impervious to propaganda because they can see right through it, this book demonstrates otherwise.
In a fascinating aside, Lefkowitz explains that she tracked down the origin of the “Stolen Legacy” myth. It comes from a novel published in France in 1731. The American writer George G. M. James based his ostensibly factual 1954 book Stolen Legacy on this work of fiction.
Sadly, it isn’t just in the area of Africana Studies that we encounter the double standards and anti-intellectualism on display throughout the book. Professors who question global warming, the benefits of “diversity,” and other articles of faith on the left risk intimidation or reprisals for saying what they believe to be true. American colleges and universities are far from being havens for objective, dispassionate inquiry. .
History Lesson is an extremely important, gutsy book. I’m afraid, however, that the people who most need to read and reflect on it—college administrators—will avert their eyes.
Once again, thank you to Mr. Leef for giving me permission to repost this well written and eye-opening article.
Remember, this may not be the rule in modern higher education, but this DOES happen. The best defense against such so-called "educators" is to start early by teaching your children how to think for themselves. Teach them that if they hear something they don't understand or that doesn't make sense, check it out. Question what they are told. Educate your kids to realize that just because a person is in a position of authority doesn't mean they are never wrong. Our children are not born with the inherent ability to simply know who's educating them and who's just trying to further their own ends. It falls to the parents to help them learn that. Don't raise another generation of automatons. As a society, we've done that. Let's try something new (and actually something tried and true, as well) -- let's raise a generation of kids who know how to think for themselves, who have useful problem solving skills, who know how to stand on their own two feet, instead of simply following wherever they are unsuspectingly led.
Like the rest of the educational system in America, even our colleges and universities are directed by their share of internal politics. Often, these politics are not originating in the offices of university presidents and deans. Instead, at times, the system appears to be essentially run by the professors, while the administrators sit idly by, cowering in the corner. Is that how you think your hard-earned tuition dollars are being spent?
One of the problems in the system involves instructors who teach classes not to educate and inform, but to indoctrinate and push their own personal or political agendas. One example of this is demonstrated by professors who twist and, in cases, revise history in an attempt to convey their own agendas. Facts take a back seat to that end. Their ultimately irrelevant to some. Is this how you want your children to spend their time and your money (or theirs)?
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying all college professors are full of crap. In fact, I believe the majority of them to be staying on topic and within the historical facts. Like everyone else on this planet, these instructors have their own beliefs on politics, religion, economics, etc. Also, like most of us, they can easily do our jobs without letting those personal beliefs interfere with their jobs. But what happens when an instructor dismisses accepted historical facts in an effort to promote an ideology all their own?
A link in "Nealz Nuze", on the website of nationally syndicated talk show host Neal Boortz, led me to this article by George Leef on the website for the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy. I found it very interesting. As a short-term college student at the University of Tennessee over fifteen years ago, I had heard this sort of thing went on in some classes, although I was fortunate enough not to be subjected to such indoctrination disguised as education. Read the article and see what happened when a professor at Wellesley College tries to take a fellow professor to task for relating factually unsound information to students in his classes.
Thank you to Mr. Leef for giving me permission to repost this well written and eye-opening article.
Clarion Call
How Truth Lost Out to Political Correctness at Wellesley
A professor describes her bitter experience defending historical fact over mythical Afrocentrism claims.
By George Leef
June 11, 2008
Are professors in American colleges and universities interested in the truth? That sounds like a strange question, but in an extremely revealing new book, Mary Lefkowitz shows that there are some who won’t let the truth get in the way of their efforts at indoctrinating students. Worse yet, administrators often cave in to these academic bullies rather than standing up for faculty members with the nerve to question them.
Lefkowitz is an emeritus professor at Wellesley College, where she taught courses on classical culture for many years. Ancient Greece is her specialty. It is hard to imagine that such a quiet scholar would become the center of a vehement controversy that would rock the campus and descend (on one side) to the level of vicious personal attacks. History Lesson (Yale University Press, 202 pages) is the story of her bitter experience after challenging the accuracy of material a professor in Wellesley’s Africana Studies Department used in his classes.
In her introduction Lefkowitz writes, “Telling the truth, instead of being our first responsibility, has suddenly become less important than achieving social goals. These goals were to be reached not by means of the usual scholarly tools of reflection and reasoned persuasion. They were to be imposed by assertion and fiat.”
One of those “social goals” that now dominate in American education is that of making various minority groups (those designated as victims of our oppressive culture) feel good about themselves. Toward that end, some professors have taken to the creation of myths. The particular myth that plays the central role in this drama is that of the “Stolen Legacy.”
Here is the way that myth goes. The culture and philosophy of the ancient Greeks was not truly their creation, but was “stolen” from Egypt. Since Egypt is in Africa and all the people in Africa are “black” this means that white Europeans were victimizing blacks more than 2400 years ago. In one particularly ludicrous aspect of this myth, it is asserted that Aristotle journeyed to the Library at Alexandria and stole books that he later claimed as his own works.
When Professor Lefkowitz learned that this and other intellectually indefensible ideas were being taught by a professor (Tony Martin) in the Africana Studies Department, she publicly challenged their historical accuracy. Among other problems with the “stolen legacy” idea is that Aristotle died years before the Library at Alexandria was built. But when she pointed this fact out to Professor Martin, he took umbrage. Who was she, a white Jew, to question his interpretation of black history?! At that point, it began to occur to her that Martin, a tenured faculty member, was one of those people who won’t let the truth get in the way of achieving their objectives.
More disturbing yet, she discovered that the dean of the college would not intervene. Quoth the dean, “He has his view of ancient history and you have yours.” Throughout the confrontation between Martin and Lefkowitz, the Wellesley administrators were cowering, spineless creatures—much like the Duke administration during the infamous lacrosse case in 2006.
Looking further into the curriculum in Martin’s department, Lefkowitz discovered that students were assigned a book entitled The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, an anonymous book published by the Nation of Islam. While masquerading as a work of scholarship, complete with 1,275 footnotes, it is a screed that seeks to promote the idea that Jews were mainly responsible for slavery. The book is hate literature with a thin veneer of sophistication. Using it in a college course is deeply troubling. The Wellesley administration, however, ducked behind the curtain of professors’ “academic freedom” when it was brought to their attention.
Lefkowitz’s purely academic criticisms of the materials being used to teach Wellesley students elicited an outrageous counter-attack by Martin, a book entitled The Jewish Onslaught: Dispatches from the Wellesley Battlefront. In it, Martin depicted himself as a hero standing strong for “black progress” against the evil oppressor class (the Jews) and craven blacks who didn’t go along with his racial harangues (such as Wellesley economics professor Marcellus Andrews and Harvard historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr.).
Martin wasn’t done yet. Next he filed a lawsuit against Lefkowitz claiming that an article she had written slandered him. The article was about an incident in 1991 where Martin had verbally abused a female student. His suit alleged that the article contained erroneous material that had damaged him professionally. Naturally, Wellesley’s administration refused to defend Lefkowitz. She was able to find expert legal help, however, through the Anti-Defamation League. The case dragged on until 1999, when it was finally dismissed.
One of the hot topics in higher education these days is whether there is a significant problem of professors turning their classes into indoctrination camps. We often hear from defenders of the status quo that instances of this are mostly made up or exaggerated, and that in any event, American students are “critical thinkers” who are too bright accept any propaganda that might happen to make its way to their ears. History Lesson refutes both parts of that defense. Martin clearly meant to indoctrinate his students with historical falsehoods, and from the letters and comments of his students about the controversy, it’s evident that many of them had swallowed his line completely. To them, Lefkowitz was an enemy just as to Mao’s Red Brigades any intellectual was an enemy. If you’ve heard that American college students are impervious to propaganda because they can see right through it, this book demonstrates otherwise.
In a fascinating aside, Lefkowitz explains that she tracked down the origin of the “Stolen Legacy” myth. It comes from a novel published in France in 1731. The American writer George G. M. James based his ostensibly factual 1954 book Stolen Legacy on this work of fiction.
Sadly, it isn’t just in the area of Africana Studies that we encounter the double standards and anti-intellectualism on display throughout the book. Professors who question global warming, the benefits of “diversity,” and other articles of faith on the left risk intimidation or reprisals for saying what they believe to be true. American colleges and universities are far from being havens for objective, dispassionate inquiry. .
History Lesson is an extremely important, gutsy book. I’m afraid, however, that the people who most need to read and reflect on it—college administrators—will avert their eyes.
Once again, thank you to Mr. Leef for giving me permission to repost this well written and eye-opening article.
Remember, this may not be the rule in modern higher education, but this DOES happen. The best defense against such so-called "educators" is to start early by teaching your children how to think for themselves. Teach them that if they hear something they don't understand or that doesn't make sense, check it out. Question what they are told. Educate your kids to realize that just because a person is in a position of authority doesn't mean they are never wrong. Our children are not born with the inherent ability to simply know who's educating them and who's just trying to further their own ends. It falls to the parents to help them learn that. Don't raise another generation of automatons. As a society, we've done that. Let's try something new (and actually something tried and true, as well) -- let's raise a generation of kids who know how to think for themselves, who have useful problem solving skills, who know how to stand on their own two feet, instead of simply following wherever they are unsuspectingly led.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
