Congratulations to Al Gore

by Ronald Bailey Reason Magazine, October 12, 2007
"Global warming is not the result of environmental sin; it is the result of human progress creating another commons problem. We do not need to "lift global consciousness"; we need to find a cheap, low-carbon source of energy. I have no doubt that man-made global warming is an economic and technical problem that an inventive humanity will solve over the course of the 21st century." To continue...Congratulations to Al Gore

I could not agree more! We must solve the problem of global warming, but not by spirituality and repentance. Rational people can solve what is a essentially a technical and economic problem. Rod

Top Stories

Dear Al, Congratulations!

Dear Al,

Congratulations!

I wish to congratulate you on winning the Nobel peace prize. I admire your work in raising the consciousness of people about global warming. I have had a change of heart from some years ago when I scoffed at global warming. I remember when they called you “ozone man” and “Owl” Gore, and I snickered. I apologize. You were a prophet crying in the wilderness. The science is in. The issue is settled. You were ahead of your time. Global warming is happening and the activity of mankind is a major contributing factor.

I know you have come in for a lot of criticism and ridicule. A few months ago, you got a lot of criticism from people who said you were a hypocrite because your 20-bedroom, 8-bathroom mansion in Belle Meade with heated swimming pool and gas-lamp- lined driveway uses 20 times as much electricity as the average house in Nashville. Also, some wondered why you need four homes. I don’t like hypocrites. I was disappointed to discover that Rush Limbaugh was a druggie. And, all of those family-value Republicans who have long-term mistresses disappointment me. Anybody might fall from Grace, but purposely living a lifestyle contrary to what you preach is wrong. It you are going to campaign for virtue, you should walk the walk. But, Al, I don’t think you are a hypocrite.

I understand you work out of your home and you have to host a lot of parties, and a mansion that big just takes a lot of electricity. It is often a tactic of people to attack the messenger when they don’t like the message. And, Al, your critics are not above playing the class-envy card. I know it is usually Democrats who play the class-envy card, but Republicans do it do when they can get away with it. The reason Republicans play the envy card less than Democrats is not that Republican are more moral; it is because it does not fit their agenda. The Democrats believe the size of the economic pie is fixed and it is their job to redistribute. Republicans believe we can always make a bigger pie. So, the use of envy simply fits the Democrat agenda better. But, in this case they are trying to use it against you. Populism is the often the refuge of scoundrels.

You can’t help it if you are rich and I don’t hold that against you. I would like to be rich myself. You being richer doesn’t make me any poorer. I don’t expect you to sell your goods and give the money to the poor. Anyway, you bought carbon offsets. Some have said purchasing carbon offsets is like buying indulgences, but if the offsets really do off set, then use all the energy you want. I don’t care. I don’t expect you to live like a commoner. And, I also understand you are remodeling to make your home more eco-friendly. You are changing out all or your light bulbs and I understand you are putting in the same kind of eco-friendly, geo-thermal heating system that George Bush has had in his home for years. Good for you.

Anyway, you won a very prestigious award. I have sometimes wondered, however, why the Nobel Prize ever got to be so prestigious. It is not recognition by your peers, like the Country Music Awards, and is not an honor bestowed on you by the United Nations or anything. Gallup didn’t poll the world to see who should get a Nobel prize. It is not like the Pope making you a Saint. Actually, the Parliament of the somewhat unimportant country of Norway selects five little-known people who decide who gets the award. Did you know that Mahatma Gandhi never did get the Nobel Peace Prize? Many think he did. He was nominated five times, but was never selected.

Al, I also know some people are trying to say that you did not deserve the Nobel Peace prize because your global warming work was not related directly to the cause of peace. However, I think the augment that if we have continued global warming, there will be conflict over natural resources and therefore, curtailing global warming will curtail future conflict has merit. Anyway, there was no other category you fit for a Nobel Prize.

In any event, a lot of other people who got the Peace Prize also came in for criticism. Theodore Roosevelt got it for ending the Russo-Japanese War and some people said he did not deserve it because of his intervention in the Philippines to suppress a revolt snacked of imperialism, but it didn’t bother me. Another great Tennessean, Cordell Hull, got it for his roll in establishing the United Nations; yet his roll in pressuring FDR to refuse asylum to a shipload of Jews seeking asylum from Nazi Germany and their subsequent death in concentration camps should have disqualified him, some have said.

Of course a lot of people said Henry Kissinger did not deserve it, despite his role in negotiating the Vietnam Paris Peace accord. Some feel the secret bombing of Cambodia should have disqualified him and others feel his betrayal of our South Vietnamese ally and the subsequent massive deaths at the hands of the Communist in Vietnam and Cambodia should have disqualified him. And, some claim that Arafat should not have gotten the award because he was a terrorist. And, then there was the African woman who claimed HIV was engineered by white scientist to kill Africans, and some felt that that tarnished her image, and she did not deserve it. So, Al, you are not the first person who got the award that critics said should not have gotten it. It is a prestigious award, so you can rightfully be proud.

Now that you got it, what are you going to do next? I don’t think you have to worry about Bush getting the Supreme Court to take it away from you. I don’t think he can do that. So, you have all of this political capital. Not only do you have this prize, but also you have the two Oscars that your movie won, and a best selling book.

Face it you have raised consciousness. Mission accomplished! So, you don’t need to do Inconvenient Truth II, and one Live Earth was enough. I know Willie Nelson is doing Farm Aid for about the twentieth time, but I think one Earth Aid is enough. After the first one, it is kind of like reruns. So what next? I have a suggestion. Use your political capital to fight for a structural change that will really stop global warming. Don’t waste your enhanced prestige to tell people to change light bulbs or properly inflate their tires. Those things are commendable, but you know as well as I do, that if the problem is really as dire as you say it is, we must do more than that, or more than tinker with the CAFE standards.

In the past you have advocated a carbon tax, including, higher gas taxes. I know that during the Presidential campaign of 2000, you said we needed lower gas prices not higher gas price, but you were trying to get elected then and I don’t hold that against you. Since then, you have often called for a carbon tax. I know many of your most loyal supporters are not going to be happy until we are all living in caves and grubbing for worms. Some are not going to be happy until we remake human nature. But, that is not going to happen. Some of your most loyal followers may have other agendas rather than defeating global warming.

If we had a carbon tax, then people wouldn’t have to be persuaded to conserve because it is a moral choice; they would conserve because the harmful effects of carbon consumption was adequately priced. People respond to prices. There should be no free polluting of the environment with global warming emissions. All of the other alternatives would be cheaper if only carbon emissions were priced. Alan Greenspan, a guy who knows as much about economics as you do global warming, says the economy could tolerate a revenue-neutral gas tax of $3. So, Al, I hope you will not waste your new prestige on symbolic things and instead will make the best of this opportunity to make the structural change this planet needs. You can do it, Al!
I know this has been a long letter. Thank you for indulging me. Again, congratulations on the Peace Prize.

Oh, by the way, I ran into you at an art opening recently, at the Tag Gallery on 5th Ave. I am the guy who said, “Are you really Al Gore or an Al Gore impersonator.” Afterwards I felt so stupid. I think I had had one too many glasses of wine and was just surprised to see you out at an art opening, like a normal person. I am normally not a star-struck idiot. I am sure I did not make a good impression. If I every run into you again, I want to shake your hand and say, “Congratulations on winning the peace prize. I hope you move on to phase II of your campaign to save the planet.”

Sincerely,

Rod Williams

Top Stories

How Ayn Rand Changed My Life

In 1992 I went to Annapolis, Maryland to attend a weeklong training session for a part-time job I had with the U. S. Department of Labor. At the first session of this training, after everyone had taken turns introducing themselves, the training instructor had us play an “ice-breaker” game. The instructor had each participant list his or her favorite beverage, book and broadcaster on a sheet of paper and turn it in. She then read off the three answers from each class participant and after each reading the class was to guess which list belonged to which person. More than one person listed “ice tea” and “The Bible”. I had easily listed “Bourbon and coke” and “Atlas Shrugged”, but not having a preferred broadcaster, listed “Katie Couric”, since that was the only name that came to mind.

When the moderator read my selections, several people guessed Louella Ballenger, one of the class instructors, as the author of my list. It seems that a few months earlier, in another training session, Louella had listed Atlas Shrugged. Some of her fellow instructors had remembered. After this exercise, I wanted to meet the other person who had listed Atlas Shrugged as her favorite book and when the mid-morning break came, I introduced my self. In our brief exchange during the break we shared how much we each had appreciated the book and we enjoyed our brief conversation and agreed to meet in the hotel lounge after class for a drink and more conversation.

When we met for that drink, we found out that we had much in common and enjoyed the conversation, and the drink tuned into dinner and then after dinner drinks. We continued to talk until late. The mellow lounge had, by this time, been taken over by punk rockers and high volume music and we continue to try to have conversation over the loud music, screaming in each others ear until we finally called it a night at about 11 o’clock.

We started the evening off talking about Ayn Rand and our political development and continued in the evening talking about current events, politics, history, our background, travel, family and children and numerous other topics. There was never an awkward moment. The conversation flowed from one topic to the other for hours. Louella was graceful, intelligent, well read, pretty, and charming. I was smitten. I had never felt so connected to another person in my life. I was excited to find someone who understood what I was talking about and who had read many of the same books and had the same heroes.

During that training week we socialized on several other occasions, often with other class members. After the week’s training ended, we continued to talk by phone and write each other letters. A few months later, I returned for another training session and our relationship deepened. To make a long story short, our friendship developed into a romantic relationship, we began visiting each other back and forth, took annual vacations together, and in 2003, Louella took early retirement, moved to Nashville, and we got married. Thank you Ayn Rand for introducing me to the love of my life.

I first read Atlas Shrugged when I was 14 or 15 years old. I plucked it off of a shelf at Anna Mae Denton’s Storefront Gospel Mission. My father who was a gospel singer would go to the mission to entertain the down-and-out and seek to save lost souls. The mission had a bookcase of used books to give away to the people they served. I doubt Sister Denton was aware that she had on her bookshelves a book by a leading atheist of the era.

Much of the book was over my head, but it stirred in me a passion for individualism, private property rights, limited government and freedom. I saw the distinction between those who see man as existing to be a slave to the interest of others and those who see that one’s obligation is to seek one’s own happiness. I saw a difference between those who wish to clamp down the human spirit and those who want to celebrate it. I clearly saw the distinction between those who lay claim to the wealth of others and those who are the creators of wealth and claim a right to what they create. The efficacy of the marketplace was clear, but so also was the moral argument for capitalism. After Atlas Shrugged, I went on to read The Fountainhead, We the Living, and Rand’s various collections of essays.

I again read Atlas on two other occasions, once in the mid 70’s when I was in college and again in the late 80’s. By the time I read the book the second and third time, I was better educated and better read. In some respects, I got more out of the book with subsequent readings. Having been exposed to economic theory and political philosophy I could more fully understand some concept that I am sure I did not grasp on my first reading. However, I was also less ready to accept her views unquestioningly. My belief in rugged individualism was tempered by other influences. And, ideology was tempered by practicality.

No doubt millions have read Atlas or Fountainhead and appreciated these books as steamy love stories or adventure-thrillers or mystery novels and skimmed over the political philosophy and never grasped their importance. Other however, read them and became more Randian than Rand herself. Like some Christians or Marxist, a few who become disciples of Rand spend their life trying to find the true meaning of the doctrine, they grapple with obscure hair-splitting analysis, and passionately seeks to purge from the movement those who are less pure than they. I never went there, and neither have most people who have been influenced by Rand. I have never considered myself an “Objectivist” and only for a few months in my life thought of myself as a libertarian, but the writing of Rand definitely influenced my political development.

Recently I saw in separate interviews, both former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas pay tribute to Ayn Rand for their political development. Scores of influential people look to Ayn Rand as the thinker who helped develop their political philosophy. Not only did she influence political thought and economic theory but also was influential in the fields of ethics, aesthetics, and psychology. Her books have sold over 20 million copies and are still in demand and those inspired by her ideas have published numerous books and founded several academic and public policy institutes. The modern libertarian movement would not exist except for the influence of Rand.

A few months ago, I saw a replay of an interview with economist Milton Freedman. The interviewer asked him about the roll of Ayn Rand in political philosophy. He said that Ayn Rand is a “great place to start, but a poor place to end up”. I thing he is correct. There is a risk in reading Rand. A few will end up on the fringe, but most will not. Most who read Rand will be instilled with a moral basis for believing in freedom and will gain an understanding of why the collectivist impulse is morally wrong. Her work is powerful. If there is one single book that I would wish every young person would read, it is Atlas Shrugged.

Top Stories

50 Years Later, Rand's Atlas Shrugged Still Relevant

By BILL VIRGINP-I COLUMNIST

For intellectual heft, the capacity to spark debate and controversy, the number of young people inspired by her writing over the decades, the endurance of her ideas as the basis of a philosophical movement, the broad influence of those ideas -- and oh yes, for the number of books sold -- she was the most important American author of the post-World War II era.

And on this, the week of the 50th anniversary of publication of her greatest work, "Atlas Shrugged," if you happen to disagree with that assertion, Ayn Rand would not be at all bashful in pointing out the grievous error in your thinking.
To continue reading: Atlas Shrugged

Top Stories

Congressman John Dingell Proposes 50-cent Gas Tax Hike to Fight Global Warming

Thursday, September 27, 2007
WASHINGTON —

Dealing with global warming will be painful, says one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. To back up his claim he is proposing a recipe many people won't like — a 50-cent gasoline tax, a carbon tax and scaling back tax breaks for some homeowners.

"I'm trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it's going to have a measure of pain that you're not going to like," Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.
To continue reading: Congressman John Dingell Proposes….

My Commentary
Everyone who believes global warming is a reality and believes we must take action to combat it should rally behind this bill. It will be an uphill battle to get this bill passed and in fact, the bill is not even introduced at this point and is only a draft. However, up until this point there have been few serious attempts to deal with this important issue. Slightly increasing CAFE standards is not a serious attempt to deal with global warming and could actually be counterproductive. Higher CAFÉ standards may actually decrease the competitiveness of alternative fuels and cause American motorist to drive more.

Most people now believe global warming is a reality. Only Rush Limbaugh and a handful of other holdouts are still preaching that global warming is a hoax. The Bush administration, while not offering any real solutions, has changed its tune and now recognizes global warming as a serious problem we must combat. So while almost everyone recognizes the reality and seriousness of global warming most want painless solutions to combat it.

Many people have watched the documentary An Inconvenient Truth or 11th Hour or went to Live Earth parties and felt informed and virtuous. Being informed is good. Changing out a bad light bulb for a good light bulb is a good thing to do. Properly inflating your tires is commendable. Being entertained, feeling virtuous, and changing out a light bulb however, are not going to solve the problem of global warming. Waiting until human nature changes and people adequately value Mother Nature is not a solution nor is relying on voluntary conservation.

Unfortunately, neither will a 50-cent per gallon gas tax solve the problem. Many people think that to change the habits of American drivers and to make alternatives to carbon-based fuels competitive, we need a gas tax of about $3.00 a gallon as well as substantial taxes on other carbon fuels. A 50-cent per gallon tax however, is a start and is a much-needed structural change. It is recognition that those who put global warming emissions into the air should pay a price for doing so. The goal is not simply punitive however. People respond to pricing. If we want less emission of green house gases, we need to increase the cost of emitting green house gases. Once the structural changes are in place, the amount of the tax can be modified to achieve the desired level of reduction. Curently, there is no cost associated with putting global warming pollutants into the air; there should be. Mitigating the harmful by-products of production and consuption should be accounted for in the price structure. While a carbon tax is not the only method of combating global warming, it is by far the most efficient method.

The organization doing the most to promote a carbon tax is Carbon Tax Center. To learn more about carbon economics and why a carbon tax is the preferred method of achieving global warming emissions reduction, visit their site. This site will tell you how you can join the fight to stop global warming and specifically what you can do to support Congressman Dingell’s efforts. You can help this cause by joining and making a contribution to Carbon Tax Center.

Top Stories

Bad Bitch

I love the work I do even if I do not always love my job. If it were all enjoyable and rewarding they wouldn’t have to pay you for doing it. As Director of Housing Services for a non-profit housing counseling agency, I have had a role in helping 685 people become homeowners. Most of these people were low income. The majority was African-American. Many were moving out of public housing. Many of them were single mothers. Most of them were the first in their family to ever achieve homeownership. Many of them had only worked sporadically until the advent of Welfare Reform.

These clients of mine attend a year-long program called Homebuyers Club. A Homebuyers Club is more than just a series of meetings teaching the fundamentals of purchasing a home. A meeting of a Homebuyers Club often resembles a revival meeting or AA meeting. Clients share their setbacks, their challenges, and celebrate their successes. Clients learn improved money-management skills and they learn how to repair and maintain their credit. They learn how to avoid being victims of unscrupulous people who prey on the financially less sophisticated. They open checking accounts and stop using check-cashing services. They learn that to get ahead you must learn delayed gratification. They budget and save money. Some of them work with us for three or four years before they are ready to purchase a home. They have to not only change their circumstances but also change their way of thinking and change their values.

These clients, when they purchase a home, do not get the exploding ARMs and sub prime loans one hears so much about, but get FHA fixed-rate loans. Most of them take advantage of down payment assistance programs such as the American Dream Down payment Assistance (ADDI) program or other assistance programs. The thing that contributes more to their success than the down payment assistance is that we help them believe that the American Dream is possible.

For most low-income people, homeownership is the key to building wealth and giving their children a better life than they had. Homeownership creates a sense of self-esteem in a person. It makes them more invested in their community. Studies show that in a comparison of renters to homeowners, holding the variable of income fixed, that children of homeowners have fewer pre-marital pregnancies, commit less crime and do better in school.

Unfortunately, not everyone who expresses an interest in our program makes it to home ownership. Many inquire but never follow through. Other try but drop out. Even those who drop out however may benefit. They may learn how to repair and protect their credit rating. They may benefit by leaning why a “whole life” insurance policy is not as good as a “term” policy. They may learn that an income tax “rapid refund” is a rip-off. So, even those who do not become homeowners may benefit from being in the program. Also, one never knows what seed may be planted that germinates years later. But you know that many other who you encounter don’t “get it”. They cannot be convinced they there is any reason to try to improve their life.

Last Saturday, I went to an event at a public housing project where we offered the clients a service we call a “Front Door”. This is a one-on-one counseling session where we review the client’s income, debt, and credit and if they chose to pursue homeownership we help them develop an “action plan”. One of my clients on Saturday was a young black girl in her early-twenties. She was the mother of three children, by three different fathers and was not receiving child support. Two of the fathers were incarcerated and one she did not where he was. She worked at a job that barely paid above minimum wage. She had never graduated from high school and did not have a GED.

She was wearing a low-cut V-neck dress. I can’t help myself; when a woman is showing cleavage, I look. Tattooed across her chest were the words “Bad Bitch”. I could not see the first “B” or the “h” but could read the words.

I wondered what would cause a young girl to so brand herself? Is it the total sense of helplessness? Is it the hip-hop culture? Was it done in a drug-induced state? Does it make her more attractive to men in her social circle? Did she ever have anyone in her life that said to her, “that is not a good idea”?

I had to tell her that her chance of achieving homeownership was very slim in her current financial circumstances. Her income was too low to qualify for even the most generous assistance programs. I suggested she join a companion program to our Homebuyers Club, called “Financial Fitness” where she could learn some improved money-management skills. I told her we offer the GED classes at our center and that if she would get her GED, she could find a better paying job and make more money, and then pursue homeownership. She said she would think about it.

There are plenty or resources to help a young lady like this. Our programs are not operating at capacity. We never have to turn anyone away. There are programs that help people get their GED, there are job-training programs, there are programs that teach grooming and “Dress of Success”. There is no shortage of programs offering support. But how do you reach people and make them believe that there is a better way to live?

Welfare reform has been a great success in ending the welfare enslavement of many Black Americans, but we need to do more. We should not be content that millions of Americans are trapped in despair and poverty. No young girl should grow up and assume that it is the norm to be an unwed mother who drops out of school by age sixteen. No young man should have to assume he will be in prison or dead by the time he is twenty.

How can they be made to believe that there can be a better way to live? I don’t know. I wish I did. But we should not give up. We need bold programs; not programs that make people dependent on a government handout, but programs that break the cycle of poverty. Perhaps we should pay a girl $5000 if she graduates from high school and is not an unwed mother. Maybe we should pay a young boy $5000 if he can graduate from high school and has never been arrested or gotten a girl pregnant. In the short run, it may cost more to help people break the bonds of poverty than to subsidize their poverty, but I think we should do it.

I will probably never hear from Bad Bitch.

Top Stories

Alan Greenspan Calls for $3 per Gallon Gas Tax

Watching Alan Greenspan on BookTV Cspan2 Sunday night I felt like I was fortunate to be sitting in the presents of a wise sage. He was being interviewed to discuss his new book, The Age of Turbulence. The next day I rushed out and purchased the book at Borders Books for 40% off of the $35 retail price. (Free plug for Borders) I look forward to reading it.
In the past, as Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Mr. Greenspan had to be reserved. If Greenspan sneezed the world economy could catch a cold. Now, out of office Mr. Greenspan is speaking his mind on a variety of subjects and it is obvious that he has thought long and hard on the things about which he has opinions. With the mind of an economist, his utterances are not emotive but reasoned rational arguments.
In the hour, or maybe longer, interview he explained why he was a “libertarian-Republican” and not a “right-wing Republican”. He told of his relationship with Ayn Rand and the impact she had had on his intellectual development. He explained why he viewed China as a partner and not a rival and why Chinese investment in the American economy was a positive development. He discussed the dangers of growing income inequality and how this gap could lead to a dangerous populism. He spoke of the evolving roll of intellectual property and how it was replacing manufacturing as a creator of wealth. He explained how world trade was making the world a more integrated and a less dangerous place. He explained why Bill Clinton was one of our best “Republican” Presidents.
One of the things he discussed that most impressed me was global warming and how to combat it. He said that it was his conclusion that the scientific evidence is irrefutable that global warming is real and a very serious threat and that we must combat it. He said that there is no way to combat global warming without reducing the output of CO2 emissions. To do so we must get the cost of CO2 up in order to get the use of C02 down. The worse single source of CO2 emissions is the private automobile. To significantly reduce CO2 emission, he thinks, we need a gas tax of about $3 per gallon phased in overtime with the revenue rebated to the public as tax cuts. He says this could be achieved without wrecking the economy.
While there are many promising technologies that could flourish, he said, if only gas cost more, the most promising technology is battery-powered vehicles. Hybrids may be an interim promising step but the solution is battery-powered vehicles where the consumer recharges his car overnight. The reason why this is so promising is that it does not require a new distribution system, as would be the case with some other proposed alternatives. Also, we would all be charging our car overnight when demand for electricity is low, thus maximizing the use of the infrastructure already in place.
I know that many of the people who have long warned of the dangers of global warming are not going to welcome economic solutions to the global warming crisis. They are not going to be content until we change human nature and people are no longer “greedy”. Expressing love for Mother Nature however and persuading people to change their evil ways is not going to solve the problem. Without the application of economic principles, the problem of global warming will not be solved. Unfortunately, at the present time no politician can get elected to office while advocating a $3 per gallon gas hike, but with people of the stature of Alan Greenspan calling for rational solutions, policy makers may develop the nerve to provide leadership and offer serious solutions. I just hope that the cowardliness of politicians and the ideologically driven obstructionism of environmentalist do not cause us to wait until we are beyond the point of no return.
I am glad that Alan Greenspan is saying the things that need to be said.

Top Stories

Moveon Democrats Show Their Contempt for the Military

General David Petraeus, the U. S. Forces Commander in Iraq, is a man who has served his country faithfully for 35 years with honor and distinction. He is a 1974 graduate of West Point, graduating in the top 5% of his class. He was the General George C. Marshall Award winner as the top graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College Class of 1983. He earned a PH. D in International Relations from Princeton University in 1987.

His awards and decorations include the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, the Distinguished Service Medal, two awards of the Defense Superior Service Medal, four awards of the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal for valor, the State Department Superior Honor Award, and the NATO Meritorious Service Medal. In 2005, U.S. News and World Report recognized General Petraeus as one of America’s 25 Best Leaders. In January 2007 he was confirmed unanimously by the U. S. Senate to become the U. S. forces commander in Iraq.

Last Thursday, the anti-war far-left organization MoveOn.org called him a traitor. The full-page ad sold to Moveon by the New York Times at a discounted rate, cleverly playing on the Generals name, and in large print asked, “General Petraeus or “General Betray Us”? They accused him of lying in his progress report to Congress.

Calling General Petraeus, the man who is leading our troops in time of war, a traitor is disgusting and beyond contempt. As one who was serving in Vietnam at a time when anti-war protestors carried Viet Cong flags and Jane Fonda visited our enemy and posed for pictures on an anti-aircraft gun, I can imagine how the troops in the field must feel when their Commander is called a traitor and politician vote to endorce that view.

Following the ad, the Senate voted 72 to 25 to condemn Moveon.org for the attack. Some Democrats joined Republicans in this vote including high-profile liberals such as Diane Feingold, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, and John Kerry. Other Democrats, many of whom had voted to confirm him as Commander back in January, refused to condemn the attack on Petraeus. The Democratic Senators who are seeking their party’s nomination for President, Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd, were among those siding with Moveon. Barak Omaba was present but choose not to vote and Senator Joseph Biden was absent, campaigning in Iowa.

Ads like this are polarizing and I guess that is the point. It motivates the base of the party and forces people to choose sides. The Presidential candidates can no longer waffle. They must decide if they will serve as puppets of Moveon and show their contempt for America's military leadership or if they will vote for decency and condemn those calling our top General in Iraq a traitor.

I don’t know how this will play out in the polls, but Democrats, while pleasing the fringe, may loose support in the middle. Also, nastiness like this may push moderate Republican who question the wisdom of our policy in Iraq, back into the Republican fold. Not all Democrats and Independents share the contempt for our military shown by the Moveon Democrats. As one who has been critical of the Bush Administrations decision to go to war and the conduct of the war, and who also has developed other dissatisfaction with the Republican Party, my loyalty to the Republican Party has been slipping. Events like this remind me why I am still a Republican.

Top Stories

Move-onward Liberal Soilders

Reprinted from Townhall.com

Top Stories

We Do Not Ensure Freedom by Holding Elections

Recently, I read a comment by someone that said, democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. A popularly elected government does not necessarily create the ultimate in good government. We should not forget that Hitler was popularly elected.

Also, we should be mindful that it can be difficult to impose freedom on a country that does not have the basic building blocks to support it. As much as we may wish it was so, not everyone everywhere is ready for democracy. We must realize that some nations are only nations because people who have little in common are held together by brute force and suppression as was the case in Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and Ethiopia.

In the following article Thomas Sowell explains why “nation-building” can be folly. It is too late to apply this lesson to Iraq, but hopefully we will learn this lesson before we are tempted to “liberate” the next country. Below are excerpts from the article.

Mugged By Reality: Part III
By Thomas Sowell
Thursday, September 20, 2007

If nothing else comes out of the Iraq war, it should banish the concept of "nation-building" from our language and our minds.

You cannot turn a territory and its population into a functioning nation with the stroke of a pen or the drawing of lines on a map.

Real nations evolve over time out of the mutual accommodations of peoples, not by imposing the bright ideas of theorists from the top down. No small part of African nations' problems comes from the fact that most became nations only in the sense that conquerors carved up African territories among themselves to suit their own convenience.

Democracy means voting. It does not mean freedom. When we lump the two ideas together, we confuse ourselves and others.
To read the full article: Mugged by Reality

Top Stories

My Proposal for a Foreclosure Avoidance Program

Here's an idea for how to avoid foreclosures
By ROD WILLIAMS
Published: Monday, 09/17/07
The Tennessean
The state or local government could develop a program that would help many homeowners avoid foreclosure without it being either a bailout of the lenders or a burden on the taxpayers.
(To continue Reading: Here's an Idea for how.... )

This article was published today in the Tennessean. I welcome feedback on this proposal. You may post your comments on this site or email me at Rodwilliams47@yahoo.com.
Also in the same issue of the Tennessean are these three articles of interest: Foreclosure issues affect all of us, by David Tarpley, managing attorney of the consumer/law section, Nashville office, Legal Aid Society of Middle Tennessee and the Cumberlands; Housing industry got away from its policies, by Eddie Latimer who runs Affordable Housing Resources Inc., a nonprofit housing corporation, and is chairman of the Tennessee Housing Development Agency; and The economy pays a price for irresponsible lending, The Tennessean editorial. You can read all of these at this link, see the center of the page. The Tennessean, Opinion.

Top Stories

In Defense of Greed

Recently, a family member of mine to whom I am very close called me in a state of despair. She had just watched the documentary “11th Hour” and was depressed about global warming and the future of the planet. The movie’s thesis is that this present moment is the last chance to save the world and we better mend our ways or it will be too late. This close relative said that she was so concerned and felt that the situation was almost hopeless. Human greed was going to destroy us all, she said.

Sometimes, I can be less than sensitive and diplomatic. It is not wise to tell a despairing liberal, “I disagree. I think greed is a virtue.” I should have gently said, “How so?" And, “ What do you mean by greed?" I then could have tried to distinguish greed from enlightened self interest.

It is hard to defend greed. By definition it is a bad thing. The dictionary describes it as, “Excessive desire to acquire or possess more than one needs or deserves.” How can one defend that? After all, greed is considered one of the seven deadly sins. To defend greed is like defending sloth, pride, or lust.

“Enlighten self-interest” may not be as offensive of a term as “greed,” but whatever we call this desire to improve one’s well being, it is a force for good. Adam Smith recognized the importance of self-interest when he said, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."

I admire those who give away their wealth to help the less fortunate. Charity and caring about the poor, the sick, or the state of the planet are virtues. However, more people are fed, housed, and healed due to the profit motive than all of the benevolence in the world. If global warming is to be solved it will be due to a proper accounting of the cost of global warming not because we can change human motivation. Once we properly account for the externality of global warming, then the magic of the market and a desire for profit will find the solutions.

Top Stories