Question of the Day

Why is it that the overwhelming majority of individuals are highly rational and intelligent beings, but when placed in a group of more than about two people the collective IQ drops by 80 percent?

I'm a Racist? Guess I'll Have to Live With That

In a World Net Daily article (linked above) posted October 30, 2007, I discovered that I am a racist. Not because of anything I have ever said or done, but simply as an incontrovertible fact of my birth. So decrees the University of Delaware Office of Resident Life.

Every student at that university living in a residence hall is being subjected to something they like to call "Diversity Education Training". One excerpt from a document used to facilitate this indoctrination of residence hall inmates reads: "A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. 'The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination….'"

Several practices and incidents are cited, which all boil down to the university encouraging, coercing, and outright compelling students to adopt their approved ideology in order to maintain standing within the campus society.

Chairman Mao may have defined education that way. I have slightly differing opinions on the topic.

A university - ideally any educational institution - should as its foundational mission be teaching students how to think. Not what to think, not what views to hold or denounce, but how to take in data from a wide variety of sources, analyze that information, and arrive at an informed, logical conclusion from which they are able to form, express, and rationally defend their own opinions.

Using a position of authority to browbeat students into submitting to and ultimately adopting a style of thought is unethical, immoral, and illegal. Doing so under the auspices of a government sponsored institution does not make it any more right or proper.

I am not a racist. Not through my thoughts. Not through my actions. Most certainly not as an immutable condition of my birth. I owe no apologies for my white skin, nor do I owe any special concessions or considerations to people of darker skin. I am simply obligated to treat all my fellow human beings with the respect, dignity and consideration that their efforts, actions, and accomplishments deserve. Some of them are black, brown, yellow, and yes, even white. Some have dangly bits while others sport innies. None of that makes them more or less deserving than me or any other of their fellows.

Those who believe the only way they can obtain any personal power in life is by defining half the population as victims and the other half as victimizers deserve nothing but scorn, ridicule, and rejection of the thesis under which they wish to live their lives - and mine. Their ideas and arguments in support of those ideas are flawed, and worthy of rejection on their own merits. Race and gender play no part in that evaluation. Any position with the fallback defense being "if you disagree with me you are wrong and in denial and in need of psychological counseling to overcome your aberrations" (why does that bring to mind one of the positions in the Global Warming "debate"?) defines itself as fundamentally invalid.

Only an idea that can be challenged and successfully defended through reason and fact is worthy of consideration. Playground exchanges of "Is too! Is not! IS TOO!! IS NOT!!!" do not meet that criteria.

Response to Follow?

Following is the text of an email sent to Hillary Clinton via the "Contact Us" link on her presidential campaign web site. Do I expect anything more meaningful (or sinister) than an auto-responder generic thank-you text? Of course not. But it can't hurt to get the details out as publicly as possible.

Wouldn't it be a pleasant surprise to hear Hillary or any of the others actually respond to the question posed? On the off chance something more should come from her camp it will be posted in this space. Keep checking back!

The message that was sent:

Mrs. Clinton,

Are you a mental incompetent, which would disqualify you for the office you seek, or intent on selling out the sovereignty of the United States of America, which would also disqualify you for the office you seek?

You dare to suggest that Governor Spitzer is doing a grand and noble thing by putting driver’s licenses into the hands of illegal immigrants. You express a heartwarming concern that all these people who are illegally in this country might harm themselves or possibly even others while operating a motor vehicle, as if somehow that is the fundamental underlying issue.

What exactly is it that you and your ilk are incapable of comprehending about the word "illegal" in the term ILLEGAL alien? These people, of their own volition, are violating the laws of this country. They do not require help assimilating - which most of them do not wish; they do not need help obtaining government services paid for by legal citizens and legal resident aliens; they do not need to have the "stigma" of their illegal status washed away by citizenship or pseudo-citizenship proposals that serve only to penalize those would be immigrants who have, are, or hope to follow the legal pathways to entry and possible citizenship.

The only assistance they require is in exiting this country with all possible haste. If you or anyone else is truly concerned about breaking up families that were illegally created while they were illegally present within this country I, and no doubt many others, are more than willing to foot the bill for transporting those family members back to the illegal alien's country of origin. I am certainly not harsh enough to want to forcibly separate a child from its parent just because that parent is a criminal.

Were some hypothetical individual (I almost wrote "were I", but don't want you sicking your Secret Service goons on me in the trumped up misinterpretation that I am suggesting or even implying some sort of threat against either you or your property) to enter your home and remove your valuables, I very seriously doubt you would be so magnanimous as to suggest that this "non-owner unauthorized reallocation of wealth" perpetrator should be shown compassion or showered with government - read taxpaying United States citizen - funded largesse to rectify his personal economic deprivation. I have every confidence that you would demand that the police and criminal justice system do everything possible to rectify such a wrong perpetrated against you.

How is it you can stand before the citizens of this nation and proudly proclaim that you lack the intellectual honesty to apply the same standards to those who are breaking and entering our nation and stealing our wealth, exporting it to family members in foreign countries? Is political expediency truly a satisfying, let alone acceptable, answer?

Jay Vreeland

Bunker Hill, West Virginia

So Long, New Jersey . . . .

And thanks for all the fish! (With apologies to Mr. Adams.)

When I first conceived of this blog entry, I intended to say that there weren't any fish. However, it later occurred to me that that is not exactly true. Minado on Rt. 10 has what is far and away the best sushi buffet I've ever enjoyed.

With so many reasons to be thankful about for leaving, it is nice to be able to come up with one true regret. I will truly miss stuffing myself so full of raw fish that it is necessary to unbuckle my belt just to sit down in the car.

Border Security with Lower Taxes

“What this country needs is a good 5¢ cigar.”

That sentiment has driven a lot of the innovation and success that defined the United States of America throughout the twentieth century. Come up with a good, solid, desirable product at an affordable price and come up with a means of getting it into the hands of the consumer. It is in that spirit that I am proposing the Border Security Tax Reduction Act of 2007.

From the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico, rather than a wall we should erect a line of .50 caliber machine guns. Spaced at intervals of 500 yards, these weapons would have a high degree of overlapping coverage. Even 1000 yards would suffice, if the government wanted to institute this option on the cheap. A supply tunnel would be required to run behind the border line. A tunnel, because the maintenance workers would likely prefer to avoid stray fire when reloading or servicing weapons.

Production of the weapons, implementation, and maintenance of the system would be highly labor intensive. The preferred source of labor for all these endeavors would be those who are currently in this country illegally. Let them earn legal status by helping defend the boarder they thumbed their noses at previously. After say, ten years, they could be promoted from recognized illegal to legal immigrant status. Progressive steps could be included in the program to answer the demands of the path-to-citizenship crowd. Taking the equivalent of the entire New York metropolitan area population and attempting to deport them is logistically unfeasible. Therefore, we should take these lemons and make lemonade. Those who truly seek to better themselves will welcome this opportunity, since an ever increasing pool of undocumented labor continues to depress the wages they could otherwise demand for their services.

So, up to this point there is a tremendous amount of capital outlay for creation and maintenance of this neo-Maginot Line. The astute reader might well wonder where the tax reduction portion of this program comes from.

The Internet.

That’s right, the World Wide Web. In 2005, the web site www.live-shot.com caused quite the uproar by offering internet based hunting opportunities for those who are handicapped, or simply couldn’t face hunting that wasn’t reduced to the personal interaction level of a video game. The same concept can be applied here. Instead of live operators manning the guns 24x7, the weapons would instead be remotely operated via internet link. Cameras for sighting and automated firing mechanisms are proven concepts and can be readily incorporated into this plan. And that is where the profit making, tax reducing opportunity of this program comes in.

Charge Americans – heck, anyone in the world who wants to do their part to preserve the Union – one dollar per minute to man the machine guns and have their opportunity to take out those who would violate the integrity of our sovereign soil. Approved border crossing sites would be protected, and legal immigrants would be welcomed with open arms. Those who think they have a better idea for entering this nation will be forced to think again. The entrepreneurial spirit of the Coyotes will need to be channeled in other directions – perhaps creating legitimate businesses to grow the Mexican economy and make it less necessary for their citizens to leave home in search of a better job? Stemming the tide of otherwise honest people who are simply looking for a leg up in life would have the added benefit of thinning the human smokescreen that facilitates would-be terrorists sneaking in.

The US-Mexico border is 1,951 miles long, or 3,433,760 yards. With a machine gun erected every 500 yards, that would require 6,868 emplacements. That represents 9,889,920 billable minutes per day, or potential annual revenue of $3,609,820,800. More than enough to self-fund this program. Premium rates could be applied for target rich times and locations to further enhance revenue generation. With current border defense resources able to be redirected to other needs and the surplus also incorporated into the federal budget, while it might be minute the net result would be the opportunity to lower taxes for the nation.

That’s a pretty good 5¢ cigar indeed.