 |
What They've Thought
|
||||
|
|
||||
What They Thought August 27, 2006 Alan
Caruba Click here for columnist bios |
|||||
It’s back to school time for kids and, of course, for the environmental crazies that means creating a huge mythology of things that will kill them the minute they venture into the jungle of hazards and horrors that await them in school. The biggest hazard I encountered was a kid named Mario who, not surprisingly, ended up in jail. I did not worry about what my clothes were made from, if the acrylic paints would poison me, or the importance of using both sides of the piece of paper. Let’s understand that, for years now, children have been taught that the Earth is virtually on its last legs and that Global Warming is sufficient for them to abandon all hope of ever being as old as their grandparents, most of whom are probably already dead from inhaling asbestos, having their lungs destroyed by radon, or being slowly poisoned from having used pesticides to kill bugs in their bedroom. Plus, those old people all ate fast foods, drank soda, and probably smoked. If they aren’t dead, they are obviously just a freak of nature. So you can imagine how thrilled I was to receive an email from something called “EcoMall.com” described as “one of the oldest and largest portals for environmental shopping.” According to the folks at EcoMall.com, back-to-school time is also the perfect time to “start introducing earth-friendly concepts into their children’s everyday lives.” Or, to put it another way, time to start scaring the living daylights out of them by ruining what fun they might have in the few, short years of their childhood. One hardly knows where to begin in the long list of life-threatening things the mere act of going to school involves. For example, “Petroleum oil, a non-renewable resource, is used in the manufacture of chemicals and plastic commonly found in most school supplies. Environmentally speaking, using supplies made from natural ingredients is always preferable.” Wait a minute! Are these loonies telling me that oil is not a “natural” substance produced by the Earth? Are they suggesting that all chemicals are automatically a hazard? That plastic is a bad thing? Yes, they are. And they are telling your children this as well. For the environmentally demented, recycling is as much a religious duty as facing Mecca five times a day is for Muslims. “Schools should remember to use both sides of the paper, save and reuse paper clips, thumbtacks, rubber bands, etc., and recycle newspapers, cans, and bottles.” Suffice it to say, recycling is expensive, requires a lot of power, and many states and cities have concluded it is a huge waste of money and manpower. It has no practical value other than to make people feel bad about using stuff. EcoMall.com is determined to warn parents to dress their children only in “organic cotton and hemp” because “conventional cotton cultivation uses 25% of the world’s pesticides.” It is also one of the most popular cloths in the world and under attack from a wide range of insect predators such as the famed Boll Weevil. You want cotton? You have to kill the bugs. EcoMall.com actually says that their cotton products “do not contain toxic pesticides.” What do you want to bet that ordinary cotton clothing doesn’t either? It is important, too, to make sure the school only provides “organic food and juice, as well as rBGH-free milk.” Have you checked the cost of organic food versus the food that all the rest of us buy at the supermarket? Perhaps most important of all is to “Make your school a toxin-free zone.” Parents should storm the local school board and demand the use of non-toxic cleaners “which can impact indoor air quality.” Whatever else is going on in school, it is essential that “toxic pesticides” are not used “in or around the school” because of the “significant health risks to your children if exposed.” Oddly, I know something about pest control, having worked with the industry for several decades. None of the pest control professionals I have known are bent on killing every child in every school in America. Quite the contrary, they are concerned with killing the legions of cockroaches, mice, rats, and other disease-spreading pests that routinely invade school cafeterias and anywhere else food can be found such as desks, lockers, and the teacher’s lounge! They fend off pigeons whose droppings degrade school structures and, universally these days, they do this work at night when schools are empty. Despite being around pesticides all day, these people actually have families of their own and their children are as healthy as yours. Many of them go into the business! Here are just a few of the school items EcoMall.com warns against: magic markers, disposable pens, plastic folders and notebooks, acrylic paints and scented art products, epoxy or instant bonding glues, artist’s pastel crayons, and glossy paper used for art projects. You have been warned! Somewhere in this great land of ours, some eco-scientists are conducting experiments that will conclusively prove that your children are in more danger in school than if they lived in downtown Baghdad. It’s all foolishness, of course, but it is a dangerous, malign and evil foolishness. It adds levels of anxiety to the daunting challenge of learning anything in today’s horrid schools that routinely fail to teach the basic knowledge children will need to survive in a world where the competition will be truly global. |
|||||
By comparison to most of those countries of the Mid-East, Israel is a small nation and it seems to do nothing but draw the fire and wrath of every despotic regime in the area. It has become apparent to me from listening to the media and various other leftist groups that when they speak of tolerance and understanding, they mean for everyone else. They speak of diversity in such poetic words, and yet are clueless. They cheerfully tell us we have to embrace alternative lifestyles. That being said... I want to know when they’re going to erect a statue to Saddam Hussein or Mao Tse Tung (his picture is probably in the front of that red book in their back pocket.) Maybe they should erect a statue of Ayatollah Khomeini, Idi Amin or Adolf Hitler. It is apparent to me that they have adopted a policy that says hatred is okay as long as it’s their hatred. I’m amused at some of the emails I get from the extremists these days. I will get a thank you from one of them for writing what I’m about to write here. I only included it as an example of how screwed up some of us are here. As you read it, I want you to understand that, like Iran’s leader, they aren’t off their rocker. They are very consistent in what they have to say. What I am saying is that their rocker is off, and there is a big difference. This person hails from the right side of the spectrum, or so he says. I’ve noticed that extreme left or right sound the same these days. Here is his email:
Here is my answer.
I wrote about this in “Disharmonic Convergence." Then, even more recently, we had the issue of a Moslem — Naveed Haq — walking into a Jewish business and shooting a few women in Seattle. The media was far and away more interested in reporting on Mel Gibson’s episode of Tourettes than they were on the Moslem shooting Jews. This has gone on in the media for years and will continue as long as they are supported. They will also show quotes wherein Iran’s leader appears to be a thoughtful person and the Israeli leader appears nuts. They tend to gloss over the fact that he said he’d light up the Israelis. He, of course, throws a few phrases in there to praise Allah. I’ve noticed that all they have to do over there is toss that name around and they’re suddenly loved. All of this is going to prove to be a serious problem for the Democrats in the next election as it becomes more and more obvious that they aren’t off their rockers either. Their rockers are just bad, too. R.A. Hawkins Web Site Contact Back to Top |
|||||
One of my editors asked me to write a back-to-school column this week. This assignment is difficult for two important reasons: 1. To me, back-to-school means buying school supplies. Unfortunately, I know little about that process. When I was six, my mom overbought book covers, pencils, and folders. It was the only time we ever went shopping for school supplies — ever. 2. I have a desk job. This means my entire life revolves around sitting at a desk, checking the clock, then checking it again because I didn’t really check it the first time. It’s hard for me to get back into that back-to-school mindset. Years after graduation, I feel like I never left. Indeed, there are many similarities between going to school and having a desk job. If there’s a difference, though, it’s that schools — especially high schools — actively put you in situations meant to highlight your shortcomings, while the working world lets you hide your shortcomings behind cubicle walls for weeks at a time. Officially, this is your reward for being old enough to handle responsibility. Truthfully, it’s because not having personal space would probably lead you to kill yourself. Most companies would rather keep you alive than train a new employee. Either way, this difference makes having a job at least marginally better and closer to freedom than spending one’s days in our nation’s educational prison system. So rather than dwell on back-to-school issues, I’d like the rest of this column to focus on something more optimistic — namely, a few of the things students are put through, which finally go away when they get out of school. If you’re reading this as a student, think of this list as a small ray of hope. If you’re reading it as an adult, think of it as a reminder that, no matter how much your life sucks, you still have it better than kids. ELECTIVES: Every school has courses that students must elect to take. Ostensibly, this means you’re interested in whatever subject those courses are trying to teach you. If you take woodshop, for instance, it means you’d like a career making birdhouses with sharp nails sticking out to endanger the lives of birds. The working world is under no such delusions. People with jobs realize employment has nothing to do with what you enjoy. Instead, you work for whoever offers you the most money at the closest distance to where you live. Then you spend as much of your workday as possible looking up things you enjoy on the Internet. This is called “time management.” GYM CLASS: For some reason, someone decided a long time ago that schools should consist of long hours spent on plastic chairs. Somewhere along the way, someone felt bad about this, so they decided to give kids an hour of volleyball and exercises in physical intimidation. Thus, the idea of Phys. Ed. was born. Most companies don’t have room for basketball nets and wrestling mats in their offices. For this reason, gym class goes the way of the dodo bird and rational political discourse once you find employment. Unfortunately, this means you can no longer use the expression, “I forgot my clothes,” if you wish to be taken seriously. However, if you find a company with generous health benefits, you can sit on your rear eating candy all day, and your boss will pay to clean your teeth. PERIODS: Like sentences and the female anatomy, schools derive their very structure from something called periods. Every 45 minutes, a bell rings to make you forget what you just learned, so you can go learn something else. Ultimately, this means you learn nothing about everything. Once you get a job, though, periods go away. At that point, being scatterbrained is called multitasking, and this is considered an asset. The more inefficient you are, the more people figure you must be doing some really good work. SCHOOL SPIRIT: High school sports hinge on the idea that you should only root for athletes who take the same buses as you do. Since people with jobs usually find their own transportation, the working world operates under a slightly different principle. Instead of pom-poms and marching bands, employers will ask you to be a “good team player.” This probably sounds like the same thing as school spirit, but it isn’t, because it’s easier. Now, all you have to do is pretend you’re listening when other people talk to you, and say things like, “What we should do is this” or, “What we really need is that” to make it sound like your goals are the same as whoever owns the company. Occasionally, someone dressed as a Cougar or Spartan will come by your desk, urging you to put your hands in the air. That aside, though, it’s a real piece of cake. SEX EDUCATION: Schools teach about sex by gathering kids together and making the process as awkward as possible. Companies teach about sex by holding Christmas parties and serving vast amounts of alcohol. Of course, this process is still somewhat awkward. On the bright side, however, the alcohol is free. Jonathan David Morris Web Site Contact Back to Top |
|||||
As a medical doctor, I’ve seen first-hand how bureaucratic red tape interferes with the doctor-patient relationship and drives costs higher. The current system of third-party payers takes decision-making away from doctors, leaving patients feeling rushed and worsening the quality of care. Yet health insurance premiums and drug costs keep rising. Clearly a new approach is needed. Congress needs to craft innovative legislation that makes health care more affordable without raising taxes or increasing the deficit. It also needs to repeal bad laws that keep health care costs higher than necessary. We should remember that HMOs did not arise because of free-market demand, but rather because of government mandates. The HMO Act of 1973 requires all but the smallest employers to offer their employees HMO coverage, and the tax code allows businesses — but not individuals — to deduct the cost of health insurance premiums. The result is the illogical coupling of employment and health insurance, which often leaves the unemployed without needed catastrophic coverage. While many in Congress are happy to criticize HMOs today, the public never hears how the present system was imposed upon the American people by federal law. As usual, government intervention in the private market failed to deliver the promised benefits and caused unintended consequences, but Congress never blames itself for the problems created by bad laws. Instead, we are told more government — in the form of “universal coverage” —is the answer. But government already is involved in roughly two-thirds of all health care spending, through Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs. For decades, the U.S. healthcare system was the envy of the entire world. Not coincidentally, there was far less government involvement in medicine during this time. America had the finest doctors and hospitals, patients enjoyed high quality, affordable medical care, and thousands of private charities provided health services for the poor. Doctors focused on treating patients, without the red tape and threat of lawsuits that plague the profession today. Most Americans paid cash for basic services, and had insurance only for major illnesses and accidents. This meant both doctors and patients had an incentive to keep costs down, as the patient was directly responsible for payment, rather than an HMO or government program. The lesson is clear: when government and other third parties get involved, health care costs spiral. The answer is not a system of outright socialized medicine, but rather a system that encourages everyone- doctors, hospitals, patients, and drug companies- to keep costs down. As long as “somebody else” is paying the bill, the bill will be too high. The following are bills Congress should pass to reduce health care costs and leave more money in the pockets of families: HR 3075 provides truly comprehensive health care reform by allowing families to claim a tax credit for the rising cost of health insurance premiums. With many families now spending close to $1000 or even more for their monthly premiums, they need real tax relief — including a dollar-for-dollar credit for every cent they spend on health care premiums — to make medical care more affordable. HR 3076 is specifically designed to address the medical malpractice crisis that threatens to drive thousands of American doctors — especially obstetricians —out of business. The bill provides a dollar-for-dollar tax credit that permits consumers to purchase "negative outcomes" insurance prior to undergoing surgery or other serious medical treatments. Negative outcomes insurance is a novel approach that guarantees those harmed receive fair compensation, while reducing the burden of costly malpractice litigation on the health care system. Patients receive this insurance payout without having to endure lengthy lawsuits, and without having to give away a large portion of their award to a trial lawyer. This also drastically reduces the costs imposed on physicians and hospitals by malpractice litigation. Under HR 3076, individuals can purchase negative outcomes insurance at essentially no cost. HR 3077 makes it more affordable for parents to provide health care for their children. It creates a $500 per child tax credit for medical expenses and prescription drugs that are not reimbursed by insurance. It also creates a $3,000 tax credit for dependent children with terminal illnesses, cancer, or disabilities. Parents who are struggling to pay for their children's medical care, especially when those children have serious health problems or special needs, need every extra dollar. HR 3078 is commonsense, compassionate legislation for those suffering from cancer or other terminal illnesses. The sad reality is that many patients battling serious illnesses will never collect Social Security benefits — yet they continue to pay into the Social Security system. When facing a medical crisis, those patients need every extra dollar to pay for medical care, travel, and family matters. HR 3078 waives the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes (or self-employment taxes) for individuals with documented serious illnesses or cancer. It also suspends Social Security taxes for primary caregivers with a sick spouse or child. There is no justification or excuse for collecting Social Security taxes from sick individuals who literally are fighting for their lives. Rep. Ron Paul Web Site Back to Top |
|||||
It is the bottom of the ninth inning in game seven of the World Series. The score: 3-3, with two strikes, and runners positioned on first and third. The stadium is quiet. And here we go… the windup… and the pitch; it’s a fast b… he swings, walloping that ball right over the firs t base line. The runners advance and… he scores! A base hit drives home the winning run! Fans are wild! Players run onto the field, hugging and slapping each other on the back! What a match! Fans sure got their money’s worth. Let’s give a quick recap about how the games lined up while our cameramen move onto the field. Can anyone imagine questioning who won this series on the basis of how many runs were scored by each team during the seven games that were played? Of course not! There would be no arguing, at least not about that. In the World Series, you don’t count up all the runs. Teams must win over and over again. Then, that being the case, why are there people who dispute that the 2000 election was stolen from Al Gore on the basis of the popular vote? George Bush won each state. And everyone knows that our national elections are not decided on the popular vote, they are decided on the basis of each win counted among the 50 states Still, some would argue that this method of electing our president should be changed (see: “Calif. bill would change electoral college”). I would be the first to counter: Never. And there are plenty of reasons that I should win this debate. First, the Electoral College corrects for defects. It balances out errors and faults in the election process. Mathematicians will explain that votes cannot be counted accurately within a half of a million. In a close election, having the electoral college in place corrects for deficiencies. Indeed, multiple wins in multiple venues produces a stronger candidate. Therefore, our current system compensates for inaccuracies. Any person voted in as chief executive is a product of multiple constituencies: 50 elections, as opposed to one. Next, although we have a national citizenship, we don’t have a national people. Those serving in the national government are a reflection of 50 state peoples; multiple peoples residing in different states, each state represented in the federal system of government. Remember, each state ratified the constitution. There have never been a national people making national decisions. Weak states have a place under the electoral system that wouldn’t exist otherwise. By casting all of a state’s votes one way, the system gives every state the importance it was meant to have. Finally, any sort of national election would distort the power of the executive branch giving it a power that no other branch could counterbalance. We wouldn’t have a president — we would end up with a dictator because a national plebiscite puts the president above every other branch. This is why electors in the college cast their votes to reflect the majority in their state. If there were proportional votes cast, again, there would be a national plebiscite. People have been screaming about our antiquated election process since before our 43rd president took office. How would the citizens of New York feel if the Yankees were stripped of their World Series trophy on the basis of how many runs were scored throughout the series rather than how many games were won? How about Chicago? I am willing to wager that a lot of people would be up in arms. In all sporting events, there are winners and losers, even if it is by a hair. That’s why the saying goes: there’s first place and there’s not first place. Nancy
Salvato
Web Site Contact
Back to Top
|
|||||
©2004-2006 by their respective authors. Reprinted by permission. |
|||||
|
news | constitution | bill of rights | our view | your view | their view awards to win | awards we've won | resources | goodie shoppe our mission | about us | contact us | privacy policy | site map | home This page last updated on Wednesday, August 30, 2006 3:17 AM Optimized for Microsoft Internet Explorer |
|||||
|
site content ©2002-2006 site design by |
|||||
