About Me

Name: godfather
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

How to Get "Expelled"

 
http://polzoo.com/component/option,com_myblog/show,Expelled-No-Intelligence-Allowed.html/Itemid,41/
 

How to Get "Expelled"

Posted by gregjaye08 in Untagged 

gregjaye08
  

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the movie, opened yesterday across America. ... It was an extremely thoughtful and thought-provoking film. It was a documentary in format. It captured both comedian Ben Stein's striking search for truth and academic and scientific freedom. It also documented big science, the main stream media, government agencies, and the academia elites' frightening fear of the truth on this nation's campuses and research labs. These two opposing worldviews or approaches served as themes, central core or message of the movie.

Expelled is essentially an exposé on the current state of affairs of the lack of academic freedom and the pronounced bias that is rampant in science, schools and government agencies in 2008. Political correctness trumps the uninhibited and open pursuit of the truth in many if not all disciplines, especially "science."

What is happening in America has happened elsewhere, Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union are two forerunners. Silencing and rejecting the truth despite the facts are the modus operandi. Here are some key questions illustrative of the dilemma we are faced with today. Why can't there be an open dialogue regarding the origin of life? Why can't the topic of intelligent design be even broached without danger of loss of one's job, tenure and/or reputation? Evolution is a mere theory and a very flawed one at that, so why must it be the foundation for all scientific research and academic thought? Why would more credence be given to an extraterrestrial life forms birthing life on earth than recognition of a Creator?

Some of these questions are raised in this serious study of the sad state of affairs in so-called science and academia today. The movie movingly portrays the complicity of the academia, the media and the courts in establishing and supporting the current severe academic restrictions on thought and expression. Our colleges are gulags instead of the freedom factories, which they deceptively tout themselves to be. This imprisonment and censorship of ideas may be one of the reasons for our second-class status when it comes to much of what is pawned off as "education" today.

Expelled does make you think. It compares this issue of what is going on in our schools and institutions to the restrictions and invisible shackles placed on blacks which necessitated and birthed the civil rights movement. Blacks were not free to pursue their dreams. Likewise, today, scientists, professors and teachers are not free to pursue certain politically incorrect avenues of study or research. They are actually censored and discriminated against when they do pursue their dreams or the truth. Expelled concludes that the issue of present-day academic imprisonment is also a matter of rights and freedom that now needs to also be overcome.

RATING

Expelled has pure entertainment value. However, it is not a feel-good, brainless feature. It also dares to educate the viewer to one of the basic hindrances to the pursuit of excellence and truth in America. It shows the damage that the institutionalization of intellectual dishonesty and political correctness causes at the expense of a free and open pursuit of the truth has on America.

I rate the movie a ***** out of *****. It is an honest, professional, sincere, accurate and well-documented pursuit of the truth. Expelled does a fine job presenting both sides of this debate. It is meant to inform and to challenge the thinking of every American who loves this country and is interested in preserving its greatness, which is embodied in its freedoms. I urge you to see this outstanding movie, bring your family and friends to it, and/or tell your friends about it.

 

This article was first posted on A Good Choice...

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Big Government: How to create and continue disaster

 
http://polzoo.com/component/option,com_myblog/show,Big-government-and-Good-intentions-How-to-create-and-continue-disaster.html/Itemid,41/
 
 

Big government and Good intentions: How to create and continue disaster

Posted by PostalPatriot in Untagged 

PostalPatriot
For the last 80 or so years now Big Government and activist groups good intentions have been tried to help "The People" and has created far more problems than it has solved. Good intentions are admirable but when their poor results are constantly ignored and not learned from the mistakes and poor results will continue, but as long as the people with good intentions "feel better" about themselves and their initial acts look good then everything is okay. Also if those with good intentions can make those with undesirable good ideas of ingenuity, the free market and individual responsibility look bad that is a plus.

In the 1920's the U.S. under Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge had some of it's best economic times. The U.S. by the end of the decade produced 34% of the worlds GDP followed by England and Germany at 10%. In 1926 unemployment was at 1% under Andrew Mellon who served as Secretary of Treasury under both Presidents. How did they achieve such prosperity? They dramatically lowered taxes which in turn increased revenue and stayed out of the way of the economy and American People and they stay out of nasty world affairs. This is probably why many historians over the decades don't give them high marks because they limited government, lowered taxes and avoided social welfare plans and schemes.

Hoover should have followed Harding who let the downturn of '20-21 work itself out, instead he made the '29-30 recession the Great Depression with a year of non-stop government intervention. First by demanding businesses keep wages high, second by interfering in agriculture, because of WWI, farm production dramatically increased but afterwards there were too many farmers. Hoover created The Federal Farm Board and paid farmers no to produce, if left alone many of the farms would have shut down and other areas of production increased instead farmers were paid not to produce and dictate prices and other industries floundered. Hoover raised taxes on over 25,000 imported items making them harder to buy and exports were in turn hit with tariffs making our products harder to sell. He continued to interfere in business, increase government spending and things continued to get worse. In comes FDR whose policies were not original but expansions of Hoover. More government intervention that resulted in artificially high wages and prices which resulted in job losses, hardships for the people and uncertainty in what the government would do next caused investors to stay away. Government did not get us out of the depression it extended it three to four years.

LBJ and the Great Society created generational welfare, destroyed the family structure, and created government paid health care when most of that care was done Pro bono before government intervention. The poor had better health care access before Medicare. Medicare increased costs in the long run as services that were voluntarily done for free or reduced prices are no longer done increasing prices for everyone. Government intervention through numerous intrusive regulations by the EPA which had good intentions to hold business responsible for pollution has since been abused by activists to put a stranglehold on them instead. If business meets standards raise the standard and fine them again, it's been the free market that has cleaned the air, water and cut back on pollution not government. People keep pointing at the poor in New Orleans calling for government help when it has been government policies and welfare that created the problem of dependency.

Other good intentions that kill are the false scare of Frankenfood. Agriculturalists and farmers have created safe efficient ways to grow more pest and weather resistant food and better farming techniques but the good intentioned environmentalist convinced thousands of Africans it was better to starve today than risk cancer in twenty years. Food rotted in ports and people went hungry. DDT banned-- OOPS doesn't cause cancer ten million poor people die needlessly of malaria, SORRY! we meant well! Now we must stop CO2 from pollution, the same pollution we exhale and is emitted by oceans and rotting foliage, and if it is causing food shortages so be it. If poor countries must stay ill equipped because Kyoto is better, we think, maybe, then so be it our good intentions will make us feel better.

Now we need to make the government even bigger and put it in charge of more things to screw up, Nationalized health care, mortgage bailouts, carbon taxes, ban any use of our own natural resources. If it's a choice between FDR and Calvin Coolidge, big government and evil unfettered free markets. I will pick Coolidge and free markets, contrary to popular belief they worked much better. The economy will have highs and lows and it always works itself especially when the government stays out of it.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Rise of the Americophiles

The Rise of the Americophiles

Posted by T. Greer in Untagged 

T. Greer

 
http://polzoo.com/component/option,com_myblog/show,The-Rise-of-the-Americophiles.html/Itemid,41/
 
On Wednesday 15th, 2008, Silvio Berlusconi was reelected President of the Republic of Italy. With Berlusconi's third win in Italy's quintennial election comes the assurance that the increase of anti-Americanism among the European middle class has not translated into anti-American sentiment within Europe's elected leaders.

A case in point, Silvio Berlusconi's Italy has an increasingly negative view of America. The percentage of the public who has a "favorable" view of the United States has dropped from 70% in 2002 to 53% in 2004. Likewise, the percentage of Italians who hold a "very favorable" view of Americans dropped by 50%. [1] This surge in anti-Americanism among Italy's public is sharply contrasted by the views of the Italian President. A staunch ally of American ideals and policy goals, Berlusconi has referred to anti-Americanism as "pure ideological trash."[2] His support of American foreign policy is aptly summarized by Slate magazine:

"In the lead-up to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, Italy was one of the first nations to grantWashington permission to use its ports, highways, and airspace and to offer landing rights at Italian bases. Berlusconi has kept 3,000 soldiers in Iraq (currently the third-largest contingent behind the Brits and the South Koreans). He has played up his visits to U.S. military cemeteries and installations in Italy, linking the GIs' sacrifice to the battle for Fallujah. He has also never missed an opportunity to wrap himself in the American flag."[3]
Despite all of this, Berlusconi has stayed in power, winning this last election with a narrow victory. Oddly enough, finding a staunch Americanist elected by a populace hostile to America is not that hard to do. Take for instance, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. This week the Prime Minister has travelled across the United States to promote British goodwill. Among other things, Brown had meeting with all three Presidential candidates, the hosts of Good Morning America, and the last six contestants on American Idol. While visiting New England (a long time vacation spot for the Prime Minister), Brown gave a landmark speech summarizing his administration's major foreign policy objectives, including a desire for continued close Anglo-American relations:
"Now is an opportunity for a historic effort in co-operation, a new dawn in collaborative action between America and Europe," he said in his hour-long speech at the JFK presidential library, adding that "America's leadership is, and will be, indispensable". The message was clear - the days of unilateralism should be behind us and the post-Iraq war tensions across the Atlantic are water under the bridge. Throughout his trip, Mr Brown seemed keen to play up the close ties between the US and the UK, telling CBS television that he is "very pro-American and I've always been". [4]
Indeed, the trend of pro-American leaders being elected by anti-American voters seems to span across the Western world. For example, here is what the Washington Post says about Canada's President, Stephen Harper:
ACCORDING TO his opponent, Canadian Conservative Party Leader Stephen Harper exposed "an agenda really drawn from the extreme right in the United States." He favored the Iraq war, opposed the Kyoto treaty on global warming, and is a social conservative to boot. He might just become -- heaven forbid -- "the most pro-American leader in the Western world." His victory would -- O, Canada! -- "put a smile on George W. Bush's face." Despite all those scary warnings, Mr. Harper and his party won Canada's election on Monday. That put an end to 12 years of increasingly incoherent and corrupt rule by the Liberal Party -- as well as the cynical and irresponsible attempt of its leader, outgoing Prime Minister Paul Martin, to use anti-Americanism.
And Germany's Angela Merkel:

Mr. Martin becomes the second G-8 leader in four months to exit from office after discovering that anti-U.S. demagoguery is no longer enough to win an election. Gerhard Schroeder, the former German chancellor, also tried to rescue his political career last fall by parading his differences with Mr. Bush; the result was the victory of Angela Merkel, who has moved swiftly to repair relations with Washington. Interestingly, both Mr. Schroeder and Mr. Martin won previous campaigns by playing anti-American cards, in 2002 and 2004 respectively. While it's not clear that the level of ill feeling toward the United States or its president has changed much in Germany or Canada, it's obviously not the foremost concern of voters fed up with domestic mismanagement -- or, perhaps, political venality.[5]

Another pro-American is France's President, Nicolas Sarkozy. As said in The Weekly Standard:

[Sarkozy] has been scornfully nicknamed "the American" or, even worse, "the neocon"--now a common epithet among the French. In a country where anti-Americanism is a national sport, his adversaries are quick to point out his pro-American views. .... Sarkozy was content to be labeled as pro-American. In fact, during his latest visit to the United States, on the fifth anniversary of 9/11, Sarkozy asked and obtained a photo-op with President Bush at the White House. Then, in a landmark speech on September 12, 2006, Sarkozy underlined his attachment to the United States: "My dedication to our relationship with America is well known and has earned me substantial criticism in France. But let me tell you something, I'm not a coward. I embrace that friendship, I'm proud of the friendship between France and the United States and I proclaim it gladly." [6]

The pattern also holds true in Asia. The Boston Globe has an article on Pres. Bush's upcoming meeting with South Korea's President, Lee Myung-bak that illustrates this point nicely:
By all accounts, Bush -- who has never met Lee -- is more in sync with his views on North Korea than he was with the two previous South Korean presidents, Roh Moo-hyun and Kim Dae-jung ... "Especially in comparison with visits by President Roh, the United States is very enthusiastic about Lee Myung-bak," said Heritage Foundation South Korea expert Bruce Klingner. "They welcome his emphasis on repairing the strained relations," he added. "There is clearly a difference in tone from a president that says the U.S.-ROK (Republic of Korea) alliance is the bedrock of South Korea's security and from a president who said what's wrong with being anti-American."[7]
And here is another Boston Globe piece, this time on Japan's new Prime Minister:
Ruling party elder and political moderate Yasuo Fukuda is expected to win today's contest for the presidency of the Liberal Democratic Party, a victory virtually certain to make him the next prime minister of Japan in a parliamentary vote Tuesday. .... Fukuda is hardly the most charismatic or dynamic politician in Japan. The son of a former prime minister, he prefers gray suits, classical music, and moderate pro-American policies. [8]

I could go on like this for hours- but I think you get the idea. From the Czech Republic to Indonesia, vocal anti-American majorities across the world have chosen leaders with clear pro-American positions.

This all leads to the question: does world opinion of America matter that much anyway? I would suggest that (at least in modern democracies) it does not. While many have suggested that America's negative image makes it harder for American policy goals to succeed, there is little evidence to support this stance. To be fair, I admit that America needs allies to get things done. Yet despite America's dive in the opinion polls, America's allies are holding strong to American leadership. The European Union, the United Nations Security Council, the G-7 -all are led by this new group of pro-American leaders.

 

The free world has chosen its course: today is the age of the Americophiles.

[Note by the Author: This was orginally published on my personal Blog, The Scholar's Stage. If you enjoyed this post, I suggest you read the other articles I have posted there.]

 

[1] "Pew Global Attitudes Project: Spring 2007 Survey, Survey of 47 Publics: FINAL 2007 TRENDS TOPLINE" Pew Global Attititudes Project. July 27, 2007.

 

http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/256topline-pastyears.pdf

 [2] "10 Questions For Silvio Berlusconi" Time Magazine. July 19, 2003. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,465796,00.html

[3] Zach Mesitte. "What the Democrats Can Learn From Italy's Election." Slate Magazine. April 2007. http://www.slate.com/id/2139369/

[4] Kim Ghattas. "Brown's speech looks beyond Bush." BBC NEWS. April 19, 2008. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7355834.stm

[5] "A Defeat for Anti-Americanism." Editorial. Washington Post. January 28, 2006. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/27/AR2006012701447.html

[6] Oliver Guitta. "Sarkozy the American?" The Weekly Standard. April 2, 2007 http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/599dliqj.asp

[7] Arsad Mohammed. "South Korea's Lee to get warm welcome from Bush." Boston Globe. April 17, 2008. http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/ articles/2008/04/18/south_koreas_lee_to_get_warm_welcome_in_washington/

[8] Joseph Coleman. "Fukuda favored to win party race, be Japan's prime minister." Boston Globe. September 19, 2007. http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia /articles/2007/09/23/fukuda_favored_to_win_party_race_be_japans_prime_minister/

Tags: America  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The America I Know: Why I Left the Far Left

http://polzoo.com/component/option,com_myblog/show,The-America-I-Know-Why-I-left-the-Far-Left.html/Itemid,41/
 

The America I Know: Why I left the Far Left

Posted by Grassroot Vizir in Untagged 

Grassroot Vizir

Today, I watched a documentary about the Lost Boys of Sudan. The documentary followed their story from when they were living in the refugee camps in Kenya to the beginning of their lives in America. It was an honest and touching story about perseverence, struggle and humanity. One person in the story, John Bul Dau, struck me most as he was the most mature of the group. Working three jobs to send money back to his family in Africa, he spoke about the great opportunities in this country and how many Americans take those opportunities for granted.

 As I watched his story, I reflected back on my own life. I immigrated to this country as a small child, I grew up in an immigrant family. When my family came to this country, we had no more than $200 in our pockets. I remember that my family of four had to live in a small basement for a couple years until my parents saved up enough to buy a house. I remember as a child, times when we had very little. I remember times when having candy or a treat was considered a luxury. Through many years of hard work and sacrifice, my family was able to move to better neighborhoods and build a life of stability for us. I remember that as a child, my father would never tolerate us not taking our studies seriously, or not aiming for goals in life. I recollect his words very clearly, he was always reminding us about the great opportunities we had in this country. He would say, "Here in America, you have a lot of opportunities that you cannot find anywhere else, it's up to you to take advantage of them, don't let them pass you by". From my humble beginnings, I was able to attend a world class university and then go on to pursue other opportunities. No, my life has not been all smooth and wonderful, I've had my share of trials and tribulations. But whatever mistakes I have made, have been my own and have been good learning experiences. In other nations, it is also possible to go from a humble background and achieve great things. However, in very few other nations is that story so prevalent.

Which leads me to the other point of my story. Several years ago when the Bush administration was moving the country towards the invasion, I had begun to be involved with anti-war activism. I felt the urge to stand up and do something because I was resolutely against the war on all grounds. First, it was an illegal war based on false premises. Secondly, the war was against our national interests, it would drain our economy and sacrifice both American and Iraqi lives needlessly. Third, I was against the idea of a small group of previleged and sheltered individuals creating so much harm against those who were poor and underprevileged. It was not only an illegal war but a great social injustice. I identified with many Leftists who were against the war based on these same grounds. I was actively involved with opposing the war. However, as the war dragged on throughout the years, I became more exposed to their many other views. It was then that I began to drift away. The far left have a view of America that was very different from the one I experienced. It was an America that was stagnant and static. A society where a powerful ruling class denied opportunities against every one else based on economic class and race. It was a society where those who worked hard would never go anywhere because they were held down by the system. It seemed to me that they were far more focused on taking away from the rich, than seizing the opportunity to join the rich. It was done in the name of populism, but what I saw was more "blame the rich for taking what is rightfully ours".

Their America was not the America I have known. The America I have known has been a generous country, a country where the child of poor immigrants, with no connections or previleges, can attain a world class education and access great opportunities. America is a country where someone can not only dare to dream, but is allowed the tools to make those dreams happen. America is a country where change can happen, where progress can occur. No, I am not saying that America is perfect. As an avid student of history, I am well aware of the many historical injustices that plague our nation's history as well as those of many current policies. Yes, I am angered by many things in our country, from great inequalities that continue to hinder many in our society to the great hypocrisies that taint our national discourse on foreign policy issues. However, it is also my conviction that what is good about America far outweighs what is bad about America. It is my belief that the American system is one that allows immeasurable opportunities for individuals to not only create and enjoy wealth, but to also make the most out of themselves, whethere in a personal, spiritual or social capacity. America is a unique place where many around the world have come to not only live their dreams but to share that dream with their new country, and we are all enriched by it.

Today, I consider myself an independent. There are issues where I definitely agree with the left or even the far left. There are issues where I agree with the right. I still believe that government has a role to play in our society, but I also believe there is a fine line between that role and becoming a hindrance to society. I believe that America is a special country, at the same time, I also believe that we need to apply the criticism and standards we place on other countries unto ourselves as well. To me, America is a great land of opportunity. Many Americans who are rooted in many generations in this country cannot see this opportunity because that is all they have known. If you lived in a surrounding of palatial luxury your entire life, would you know the feeling of cold or hunger? No. Perhaps simply not enjoying your favorite dessert for one day would be considered a grave injustice. Only when one has undergone great perseverance, can they truly relish the opportunities they are given. However, although America is a land of opportunity, those opportunities will not simply fall on your lap, but they are to be seized. With every opportunity seized, others will multiply. However, for those who are unafraid of sacrifice and revel at the opportunity to improve themselves, there is no country that is more generous and more fair. That is the America I know, and whenever I feel that I am starting to take things for granted, I always remember those words from my father admonishing me. "Son, you are in America, there is great opportunity all around you".

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »