► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Thomas Sowell’

Inept or intentional?

by Mojambo ( 131 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Politics at April 1st, 2014 - 1:00 pm

Actually I think it is a combination of both.  He miscalculated his “popularity” in the world which shows a mindset that tends to personalize issues and he is not even remotely qualified for the position he occupies.

by Thomas Sowell

Many people are lamenting the bad consequences of Barack Obama’s foreign policy, and some are questioning his competence.

There is much to lament, and much to fear. Multiple setbacks to American interests have been brought on by Obama’s policies in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Crimea and — above all — in what seems almost certain to become a nuclear Iran in the very near future.

The president’s public warning to Syria of dire consequences if the Assad regime there crossed a “red line” he had drawn seemed to epitomize an amateurish bluff that was exposed as a bluff when Syria crossed that red line without suffering any consequences.

[……]

When some future president of the United States issues a solemn warning internationally, and means it, there may be less likelihood that the warning will be taken seriously. That invites the kind of miscalculation that has led to wars.

Many who are disappointed with what seem to be multiple fiascoes in President Obama’s foreign policy question his competence and blame his inexperience. Such critics may be right, but it is by no means certain they are.

Like those who are disappointed with Obama’s domestic policies, critics of his foreign policy may be ignoring the fact that you cannot know whether someone is failing or succeeding without knowing what he is trying to do.

Whether ObamaCare, for example, is a success or a failure depends on whether you think the president’s goal is to improve the medical treatment of Americans or to leave as his permanent legacy a system of income redistribution, through ObamaCare, and tight government control of the medical profession.

Much, if not most, of the disappointment with Obama comes from expectations based on his words, rather than on an examination of what he has done over his lifetime before reaching the White House.

[……]

He was so convincing that many failed to connect the dots of his past life that pointed in the opposite direction from his words. “Community organizers,” for example, are not uniters but dividers — and former community organizer Obama has polarized this country, despite his rhetoric about uniting us.

Many were so mesmerized by both the man himself and the euphoria surrounding the idea of “the first black president” that they failed to notice that there were any dots, much less any need to connect them.

One dot alone — the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose church the Obamas attended for 20 years — would have been enough to sink any other presidential bid by anyone who was not in line to become “the first black president.”

The painful irony is that Wright was just one in a series of Obama’s mentors hostile to America, resentful of successful Americans, and convinced that America had too much power internationally and needed to be brought down a peg.

Anti-Americanism was the rule, not the exception, among Obama’s mentors over the years, beginning in his childhood. When the young Obama and his mother lived in Indonesia, her Indonesian husband wanted her to accompany him to social gatherings with American businessmen — and was puzzled when she refused.

He reminded her that these were her own people. According to Obama’s own eyewitness account, her voice rose “almost to a shout” when she replied: “They are not my people.” Most of Obama’s foreign policy decisions since becoming president are consistent with this mindset.

He has acted repeatedly as a citizen of the world, even though he was elected to be president of the United States.  [……]

Cutbacks in military spending, while our adversaries have increased their military buildups, ensure that these changes to our detriment will continue even after Obama has left the White House.

Is that failure or success?

Read  the rest – Is Obama’s inept foreign policy incompetent or inntentional?

Republicans and Blacks

by Mojambo ( 186 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Economy, Elections, Mitt Romney, Republican Party, unemployment at March 26th, 2014 - 12:00 pm

Rand Paul – unlike most Republican activists – actually seems interested in expanding the Republican Party. The day we can get 20 -25% of the Black vote is the day that the Democratic Party sinks into irrelevance but the first thing we need to do is actually show ourselves in Black neighborhoods and rebuild our urban arm. Instead of promoting vanity candidates such as the pizza guy, look more to serious thinkers such as Thomas Sowell.

by Thomas Sowell

Recently former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice added her voice to those who have long been urging the Republican Party to reach out to black voters. Not only is that long overdue, what is also long overdue is putting some time — and, above all, some serious thought — into how to go about doing it.

Too many Republicans seem to think that the way to “reach out” is to offer blacks and other minorities what the Democrats are offering them. Some have even suggested that the channels to use are organizations like the NAACP and black “leaders” like Jesse Jackson — that is, people tied irrevocably to the Democrats.

Voters who want what the Democrats offer can get it from the Democrats. Why should they vote for Republicans who act like make-believe Democrats?

Yet there are issues where Republicans have a big advantage over Democrats — if they will use that advantage.  [……]

The issue on which Democrats are most vulnerable, and have the least room to maneuver, is school choice. Democrats are heavily in hock to the teachers’ unions, who see public schools as places to guarantee jobs for teachers, regardless of what that means for the education of students.

There are some charter schools and private schools that have low-income minority youngsters equaling or exceeding national norms, despite the many ghetto public schools where most students are nowhere close to meeting those norms. Because teachers’ unions oppose charter schools, most Democrats oppose them, including black Democrats up to and including President Barack Obama.

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio’s recent cutback on funding for charter schools, and creating other obstacles for them, showed a calloused disregard for black youngsters, for whom a decent education is their one shot at a better life.

But did you hear any Republican say anything about it?

Minimum wage laws are another government-created disaster for minority young people.

Many people today would be surprised to learn that there were once years when the unemployment rate for black 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds was under 10 percent. But their unemployment rates have not been under 20 percent in more than half a century. In some years, their unemployment rate has been over 40 percent.

Why such great differences between earlier and later times? In the late 1940s, inflation had rendered meaningless the minimum wage set in 1938.  […….]

Young people need job experience, at least as much as they need a paycheck. And no neighborhood needs hordes of idle young men hanging around, getting into mischief, if not into crime.

Republicans have failed to explain why the minimum wage laws that Democrats support are counterproductive for blacks. Worse yet, during the 2012 election campaign Mitt Romney advocated indexing the minimum wage for inflation, which would not only guarantee its bad effects, but would put an end to discussing those bad effects.

Are issues like these going to switch the black vote as a whole over into the Republican column at the next election? Of course not. Nor will embracing the Democrats’ racial agenda.

But, if Republicans can reduce the 90 percent of the black vote that goes to Democrats to 80 percent, that can be enough to swing a couple of close Congressional elections — as a start.

Even to achieve that, however, will require targeting those particular segments of the black population that are not irrevocably committed to the Democrats. Parents who want their children to get a decent education are one obvious example. But if Republicans aim a one-size-fits-all message at all blacks they will fail to connect with the particular people they have some chance of reaching.

First of all, Republicans will need to know what they are talking about. There are books like “Race and Economics” by Walter Williams, which show that many well-meaning government programs have been counterproductive for minorities. And there are people like Shelby Steele and the Thernstroms with valuable insights.

But first Republicans have got to want to learn, and to be willing to do some thinking, in order to get their message across.

Read the rest – Republicans and Blacks

Rodan Addendum: Roger L. Simon from PJ Media discusses the racist nature of the Progressives.

As one of the relatively few people (percentage wise) to have spent more than a decade on both sides of our political divide, and also to have participated personally in the civil rights movement in the South in the sixties, I am going to say something that will be extremely controversial to liberals, indeed make them hate me.  Given all those years I spent on the two sides, I have observed liberals to be vastly more racist than conservatives and libertarians.

 It isn’t even close. During the time I was on the left, I heard  many racially disparaging comments by my associates either offered in confidence or as off-hand remarks.  During my time on the right,  I heard such a comment only one time — and that was by a Frenchman. (Frankly, it didn’t surprise me.  I have spent a certain amount of time in France and heard more racism around the dinner table than I ever have in this country.)  I will add that, though I don’t classify myself as a Tea Party member, in the seven years I was CEO of PJ Media, I met or spoke on the phone with dozens of  Tea Partiers.  Not a single one of them ever said or did anything that approached racism to me.  And I was certainly paying attention. That was my job.

The roots of this divide are not just the obvious Freudian projection — those who accuse you of something evil are usually the ones perpetrating it.  That’s true enough.  But it’s far more than that.  The Democratic Party has been waging a War on Black People since the Great Society of 1964-65 (actually for far longer than that) that has reached horrifying proportions in our time.  That nearly 73 percent of African Americans are currently born out of wedlock, 67 percent living in single parent homes, is nothing short of disastrous with yet more disastrous auguries for the future.

And all this during the administration of our first black president.  The level of hypocrisy is astronomical.

I experienced first hand Progressive racism in the NYC Public Schools in the Pre-Guiliani era. I saw Immigrant students from Eastern Europe put in regular classes. Immigrant students from Latin America were thrown in ESL classes. The implication is that Spanish speakers are biologically inferior to East Europeans. Sadly many in the Republican Party refuse to call out this racism.

(Hat Tip: Iron Fist)

A Few Moments With Thomas Sowell

by Flyovercountry ( 66 Comments › )
Filed under Conservatism, Libertarianism, The Political Right at September 20th, 2013 - 4:00 pm

I’ve seen more than a few posts over the last couple of days in which the constant reference to race on my least favorite news network has been suddenly noticed. It would seem that everything on MSNBC is being reported on through that particular prism. The self anointed lords of tolerance, being the most intolerant people on our planet in actuality is not what I find to be consequential. That their statements tend to be ill conceived, moronic, without perspective or even accurate reference is what irks me. If you want to have a continuous conversation about race, O.K. fine. The First Amendment says, and rightly so by the way, that you can use the resources of your powerful transmitter and beautifully marketed syndication and distribution channel to speak to what ever issue you wish. Those who want to listen to you pontificate endlessly on one singular issue are free to tune in, while those who wish to talk about something else are free to tune you out.

What does irk me just a little, is how on Earth can one subject remain the entirety of your programming, constantly, and yet having that one coherent thought we’ve all been waiting for with baited breath remains so elusive. All political disagreement with our current President is dismissively labeled as racist, regardless of how much empirical evidence is produced to illustrate reason for that disagreement. Recently, MSNBC has decided to include another wealthy white self anointed scold, Alec Baldwin, to their ranks. Never mind the fact that he himself has embarked on some of the most embarrassing diatribes that would have given Mel Gibson pause, he’s still a member of good standing within the ranks of the political left. That means that as long as he calls out Conservatives as racist, he can spew his own hateful rants without account or repercussion.

So, just to keep pace in the endless discussion on race, brought to us by all who reside on the left side of our national divide, not for the purpose of healing anything mind you, but rather for the purpose of ending all thought and expression of desire for smaller government, free markets, and self determination, I have decided to allow Dr. Thomas Sowell make my points for me. Dr. Sowell is the creator of a school of economics known as empiricism. He was a student of Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago, and was hand picked by Friedman as a replacement for his fellowship at the Hoover Institution.

The more cynical among you may believe, and even state that I picked Sowell’s many statements on the issue of race because of the color of his skin, and not for the content of his intellect. I can assure you that this is not the case, the color of Dr. Sowell’s skin is merely a happy coincidence. I will however point out that in every instance, it is a white liberal who labels Sowell’s views as being racist.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

The G.O.P. deserved to lose

by Mojambo ( 161 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Elections 2012, History, Mitt Romney, Republican Party, The Political Right at January 2nd, 2013 - 3:00 pm

Maybe the GOP deserved to lose, but not the nation. I did not know the Robert Bork story that Sowell mentions, however I am not surprised. George W. Bush would do over 20 years later  the exact same thing that the GOP Establishment urged Robert Bork in the face of withering, libelous attack,  i.e. do nothing.

by Thomas Sowell

The beginning of a new year is often a time to look forward and look back. The way the future looks, I prefer to look back — and depend on my advanced age to spare me from having to deal with too much of the future.

If there are any awards to be given to anyone for what they did in 2012, one of those rewards should be for prophecy, if only because prophecies that turn out to be right are so rare.

With that in mind, my choice for the prediction of the year award goes to Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal for his column of January 24, 2012 titled: “The GOP Deserves to Lose.”

Despite reciting a litany of reasons why President Obama deserved to be booted out of the White House, Stephens said, “Let’s just say right now what voters will be saying in November, once Barack Obama has been re-elected: Republicans deserve to lose.”

To me, the Republican establishment is the 8th wonder of the world. [……..]

Bret Stephens said, back at the beginning of 2012, that Mitt Romney was one of the “hollow men,” and that voters “usually prefer the man who stands for something.”

[…….]He is only the latest in a long series of presidential candidates backed by a Republican establishment that seems convinced that ad hoc “moderation” is where it’s at — no matter how many of their ad hoc moderates get beaten by even vulnerable, unknown or discredited Democrats.

Back in 1948, when the Democratic Party splintered into three parties, each one with its own competing presidential candidate, Republican candidate Thomas E. Dewey was considered a shoo-in.

Best-selling author David Halberstam described what happened: “Dewey’s chief campaign tactic was to make no mistakes, to offend no one. His major speeches, wrote the Louisville Courier Journal, could be boiled down ‘to these historic four sentences: Agriculture is important. Our rivers are full of fish. You cannot have freedom without liberty. The future lies ahead…'”

Does this sound like a more recent Republican presidential candidate?

Meanwhile, President Harry Truman was on the attack in 1948, with speeches that had many people saying, “Give ’em hell, Harry.” He won, even with the Democrats’ vote split three ways.

But, to this day, the Republican establishment still goes for pragmatic moderates who feed pablum to the public, instead of treating them like adults.

It is not just Republican presidential candidates who cannot be bothered to articulate a coherent argument, instead of ad hoc talking points.

Have you yet heard House Speaker John Boehner take the time to spell out why Barack Obama’s argument for taxing “millionaires and billionaires” is wrong?

[…….]

What we all should be worried about are high tax rates driving American investments overseas, when there are millions of Americans who could use the jobs that those investments would create at home.

Yet Obama has been allowed to get away with the emotional argument that the rich can easily afford to pay more, as if that is the issue. But it will be the issue if no one says otherwise.

One of the recent sad reminders of the Republicans’ tendency to leave even lies and smears unanswered was a television replay of an old interview with the late Judge Robert Bork, whose nomination to the Supreme Court was destroyed by character assassination.

Judge Bork said that he was advised not to answer Ted Kennedy’s wild accusations because those false accusations would discredit themselves. That supposedly sophisticated advice cost the country one of the great legal minds of our time — and left us with a wavering Anthony Kennedy in his place on the Supreme Court.

Some people may take solace from the fact that there are some articulate Republicans like Marco Rubio who may come forward in 2016. But with Iran going nuclear and North Korea developing missiles that can hit California, it may be too late by then.

Read the rest –  Happy New Year?