What a Week in the News!
Browsing through one of my favorite haunts, the Drudge Report, I found a few stories worth mentioning.
First, a “measure being written by Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., would give the FBI new power to issue administrative subpoenas, which are not reviewed by a judge or grand jury, for quickly obtaining records, electronic data or other evidence in terrorism investigations”.
Now, I’m all for the ability to catch would-be terrorists without having to jump through all sorts of red tape. What worries me, however, is the huge potential for abuse. Several Clinton critics wound up being audited by the IRS under very suspicious circumstances. Put another person in power who isn’t bound by such archaic concepts as honesty and responsibility and we’ll have several conservatives being rounded up for terrorism charges. I’m sorry, did I say “conservatives”? I meant, “political critics of a presidential administration”.
Next, “the Bush administration said Wednesday it will impose new limits on imports of clothing from China. The action follows complaints that a surge of Chinese apparel to the United States was hurting U.S. companies.”
China is America’s biggest enemy right now, and on several fronts. They are trying to hit us financially by artificially deflating their currency, making our goods more expensive there and their goods less expensive here. And they have been building up their arms for a long time, most likely for a showdown over Taiwan. They are effectively using American consumers to finance their ambitious program to eventually dominate the United States and the rest of the world.
The problem is, China supplies so many inexpensive goods worldwide that there would be a severe slowdown in consumer purchases, which would in turn lead to layoffs and big economic downturns worldwide. So do we cause a bunch of people to lose their jobs or do we continue feeding our enemy? It’s an easy choice when you look at the big picture, but a tough decision in the short term. Maybe banning their shirts, pants, and underwear is a sort of middle-of-the-road step.
In other news, Ann Coulter has questioned, in her usual gentle fashion, Newsweek’s criteria for publishing articles. She illustrates the contrast between their quickly published, quickly retracted story about Korans being flushed down the toilet at Guantanamo Bay to their refusal to mention how Saudi Arabia just arrested 40 Christians for “trying to spread their poisonous religious beliefs”. In fact, I don’t seem to recall any mainstream news outlet mentioning this story at all. But don’t take this the wrong way. The media isn’t liberal – they’re just anti-Christian.
And that brings us, rather ironically, to the last story. The New York Times, of all organizations, ran an article with a paragraph that begins like this: “The liberal advocacy group Moveon.org was preparing ...”. The liberal advocacy group? The liberal advocacy group? The New York Times actually identified any person or any group of people as liberal? Did they, in fact, acknowledge that anything exists other than centrists and hard-right wingers? I am flabbergasted.
And that’s the way it is.
First, a “measure being written by Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., would give the FBI new power to issue administrative subpoenas, which are not reviewed by a judge or grand jury, for quickly obtaining records, electronic data or other evidence in terrorism investigations”.
Now, I’m all for the ability to catch would-be terrorists without having to jump through all sorts of red tape. What worries me, however, is the huge potential for abuse. Several Clinton critics wound up being audited by the IRS under very suspicious circumstances. Put another person in power who isn’t bound by such archaic concepts as honesty and responsibility and we’ll have several conservatives being rounded up for terrorism charges. I’m sorry, did I say “conservatives”? I meant, “political critics of a presidential administration”.
Next, “the Bush administration said Wednesday it will impose new limits on imports of clothing from China. The action follows complaints that a surge of Chinese apparel to the United States was hurting U.S. companies.”
China is America’s biggest enemy right now, and on several fronts. They are trying to hit us financially by artificially deflating their currency, making our goods more expensive there and their goods less expensive here. And they have been building up their arms for a long time, most likely for a showdown over Taiwan. They are effectively using American consumers to finance their ambitious program to eventually dominate the United States and the rest of the world.
The problem is, China supplies so many inexpensive goods worldwide that there would be a severe slowdown in consumer purchases, which would in turn lead to layoffs and big economic downturns worldwide. So do we cause a bunch of people to lose their jobs or do we continue feeding our enemy? It’s an easy choice when you look at the big picture, but a tough decision in the short term. Maybe banning their shirts, pants, and underwear is a sort of middle-of-the-road step.
In other news, Ann Coulter has questioned, in her usual gentle fashion, Newsweek’s criteria for publishing articles. She illustrates the contrast between their quickly published, quickly retracted story about Korans being flushed down the toilet at Guantanamo Bay to their refusal to mention how Saudi Arabia just arrested 40 Christians for “trying to spread their poisonous religious beliefs”. In fact, I don’t seem to recall any mainstream news outlet mentioning this story at all. But don’t take this the wrong way. The media isn’t liberal – they’re just anti-Christian.
And that brings us, rather ironically, to the last story. The New York Times, of all organizations, ran an article with a paragraph that begins like this: “The liberal advocacy group Moveon.org was preparing ...”. The liberal advocacy group? The liberal advocacy group? The New York Times actually identified any person or any group of people as liberal? Did they, in fact, acknowledge that anything exists other than centrists and hard-right wingers? I am flabbergasted.
And that’s the way it is.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home