|
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Chris Charles: Democratic Double Standard
Not that Democrats ever really have good policy ideas, but this week they have a particularly idiotic policy idea.
I expect the Dems to push for socialized medicine, socialized banks, socialized entitlement programs, socialized environmental
policy, and so on. The idea being floated by the Dems this week make their normal agenda seem downright sound.
Our
liberal friends are beginning to see the writing on the wall, they understand that without a 60 vote majority in the Senate
they are unable to ram through ultra liberal legislation. Instead of reassessing their policy proposals to make them more
‘palatable’ to regular Americans they are now seeking to rewrite the rule book. At the moment Dems still hold
a majority in the Senate, if they can simply ‘do away’ with the filibuster rule in the Senate, they COULD ram
through their ultra left wing agenda. Never mind that the Senate filibuster was set in place by the founding fathers to insure
that legislation wasn’t passed ‘willy-nilly’, the very same Democrats that now want to repeal the filibuster
were in fact it biggest fan a few short years ago.
Yes,
when Democrats were the minority the filibuster was a necessary legislative tool put in place by the founders meant to protect
the right of the minority party and to limit the majority party from wielding too much power. Now that the show is on the
other foot, the shoe is REALLY on the other foot, since the Dems are the majority party in the Senate the old filibuster rule
is just an outdated Senate procedure that is allowing the minority (Republicans) to be obstructionists.
Given that
there are a number of ‘moderate’ Republicans (AKA liberal, turncoat Republicans) in the Senate, it says something
about the legislation if the Dems cannot get a single Republican to vote for it. If Dems can’t get RINO’s like
Olympia Snowe to support a piece of legislation because it is too liberal, it REALLY must be liberal. The Dems should focus
on passing left wing legislation, trying to pass ultra left wing legislation is not happening and it will quicken their eventual
demise.
Based on the current political climate,
I don’t think changing the filibuster rule is a very good idea for the Dems, because in a few short months they just
might be the minority party, AGAIN. Although knowing them they wouldn’t have any reservations about changing the rule
back.
Just look at what Democrats did in Massachusetts; Democrats changed the rules in 2004 to prevent
then Governor Mitt Romney from appointing an interim replacement for John Kerry, if he were to win the Presidency. Then five
short years later, with Ted Kennedy in declining health they changed them back, because this time they had a Democrat in the
Governor’s mansion.
When Democrats can’t change the rules they simply break the rules, without consequences.
Nobody is surprised when a politician is found to have cheated, stolen, lied, bribed, assaulted, embezzled, raped, racketeered,
or perjured but somehow Democratic politicians seem to almost always get away with skirting the rules (See John Murtha, Chris
Dodd, Charlie Rangel, Kent Conrad, just to name a few.)
So how it is that Dems can constantly get away with changing and/or breaking the rules without consequence?
Because their accomplices in the main stream media have standards for journalistic integrity that are about as flexible as
the Massachusetts rule book on Senate appointments. The main stream media in this country are not so much journalists as they
are spokespeople for the DNC and the left wing establishment.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Chris
Charles: From Content of Character To Content of Melanin
In his famous “I have a dream” speech, Dr Martin Luther King Jr did not say that he had a dream of
a day when minorities would receive special treatment, where standards would be lower for people of color. In fact, he said
the opposite; he said he dreamed of a day when people would be judged by the content of their character. We have done a 360
in this country vis-a-vis racial politics; instead of fulfilling Dr King’s dream of equality, we have substituted the
target of discrimination.
Conservatives opposition to affirmative action and race based preferences is one of
the biggest reasons why conservatives are branded as ‘racists’ by liberals. Conservatives are only trying
to realize the dream of Dr King. Equality can never exist when there are different rules for different races. Conservatives
opposed discrimination of minorities throughout history, and we oppose discrimination of non minorities in the present. This
is not about black or white; it is about fair or unfair, right or wrong, and equality or inequality.
Affirmative
action is not only unfair, it can be dangerous! Look no further than the New Haven Firefighter case that Sonia Sotomayor ruled
on. Qualified white and Hispanic firefighters were denied promotion because no blacks would be promoted as well. Do we really
want less qualified firefighters protecting us from an inferno? How comfortable would you feel on a plane if the pilot was
hired because of his or her skin color, not his or her flying ability? Most Americans want a police force that protects them,
not one that is ‘representative of the community’. How would that conversation go?
Captain: “OK
Chief, we’ve got a position to fill on the anti-gang unit. Who should we fill the position with? What about Lt Jones?
He has the top scores in the department in almost every category.”
Chief: “No let’s go with Lt
Smith”
Captain: “Smith sir? But Smith doesn’t run very well, and his test scores are subpar.”
Chief: “Yeah but he will help the department’s diversity image”.
Conservatives
believe in merit based preferences, not race based preferences. There are no differences between the races other than skin
color. Skin color should not be a reason to deny nor accept someone. Conservatives want to get past the lefts obsession with
race. Everything is seen through race colored glasses, a far cry from a color blind society. There will always be some bigots
in the world that hate people of other races, but those types people are increasingly rare these days. The world is not and
will never be perfect, the government should not legislate inequality to try to heal the scares of our sad past. This will
only succeed in deepening the wound.
Affirmative action is not only unfair to non minorities; it does not
do minorities any favors either. It is an insult to minorities to say they need extra help, or lower standards. That is just
a more subtle form of bigotry. Conservatives know that minorities can be just as successful in life without demeaning them
with ‘preferential treatment’. Why do people of color need lower standards? This implies minorities are somehow
not as capable as non minorities. Minorities do not need special treatment, only equal treatment, something we will never
have as long as affirmative action is practiced.
Affirmative action hurts the very people it tries to help. Unfortunately,
the accomplishments of minorities are tarnished by affirmative action. Minorities in high positions will always be under a
cloud of suspicion that their achievements came as a result of their skin color. Most minorities do not need affirmative action
to be successful and the fact that minorities are given preferential treatment waters down their success. Another unintended
consequence of lowered standards for minorities is that unqualified minorities are put in positions that they are unprepared
for, which can be counterproductive to the original goal. If a person gains admission to Harvard with inferior test scores
but cannot pass classes and is unable to graduate, is the person better off?
Conservatives seek a ‘color blind’ society; affirmative
action supporters see everything through the prism of race. Because we refuse to buy into the idea that minorities need extra
help in life we are considered racist by some. Merit based preferences are not racist, they are fair. They treat all people,
all races, equally based on the individual’s qualifications.
FLASHBACK 8/4/2009
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Chris Charles: A Religion in Pieces
Take a guess, which major world religion was responsible for firebombing
places of worship of another religion recently? If you guessed Buddhism, you’d be wrong.
Once again some of the ‘faithful’
from the so-called ‘religion of peace’ are proving to be anything but peaceful. We all know the Al Qaeda types
haven’t got both hands on their steering wheel but now even some Muslims in Malaysia are running the jihadist playbook.
In recent days, three Christian Churches have been attacked by incensed Muslims. What are they so incensed over? Because the
Malaysian courts have ruled that Catholic Churches can use the word ‘Allah’ in referring to God in Arabic. Apparently,
some Muslims in Malaysia aren’t too keen on the decision if they have taken to firebombing Churches.
Islam is a religion in pieces, one piece wants to kill everybody
and the other piece is peaceful and is struggling to drive out a minority that has perverted their faith.
According to faithful Muslims, Islam is a non-violent religion that merely seeks
to worship God in peace. Unfortunately for us the ‘REALLY FAITHFUL’ Muslims don’t see things the same way.
The next time I hear of any other major religion attacking the Islamic faith (or any other faith for that matter) will be
the first time, at least in the last 500 years or so. So maybe they should reconsider that ‘religion of peace’
slogan.
If Islam is so peaceful, why are practitioners of that religion in conflict with people in nearly every corner of the
globe? It’s not just Americans that radical Islamic extremists hate. In fact, to go a step further, there are not many
people in the world that radical Muslims DON’T hate. Islamic radicals hate everyone but other Islamic radicals, but
even then there are no promises.
Muslim Madmen have instigated conflicts in places including but not limited to: Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Egypt, Yemen, UAE, Oman, Turkey, Israel, Somalia, Sudan, Algeria, Spain, England, France, Denmark, The Philippines, Indonesia,
and Malaysia.
I know that the majority
of Muslims are peaceful people and furthermore I know that true Islam is not a violent religion. It just so happens that a
substantial number of Muslims are blood-thirsty deranged homicidal maniacs. The ‘real’ Muslims need to help us
defeat these soldiers of death so that Islam can truly be called a religion of peace.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Chris Charles: The Captain & Chris
Living in LA you will run into celebrities of one form or another from time
to time, I am definitely not one to be ‘star struck’ when I meet somebody with some notoriety. That said I was
extremely excited to meet a hero of mine on New Year’s Day. Captain Chesley ‘Sully’ Sullenberger III served
as this year’s Grand Marshal of the Tournament of Roses in Pasadena, and yours truly had the honor of meeting him prior
to the Rose Bowl Game between Ohio State and Oregon. Sully was accompanied by his beautiful wife and daughters along with
the Rose Queen and her Rose Princesses; I guess I should have been more excited to meet them but I was too preoccupied with
the 57 year old guy with a mustache. I have met actors, athletes and politicians before and never have
I been so thrilled to shake somebody’s hand. I felt like a teenage girl meeting the Jonas Brothers, only without the
screaming.
The word ‘hero’ doesn’t even begin to describe Captain Chesley Sullenberger.
As you may know Captain Sullenberger was the pilot of the US Airways jet that lost both of its engines
shortly after takeoff from New York’s LaGuardia airport. Captain Sullenberger (or ‘Sully’ as he is known
to those of us close to him) managed to successfully ‘ditch’ the Airbus A320 in New York’s Hudson River
and remained onboard in the sinking cabin until each of the passengers and crew members were safely out of the aircraft. The
story of US airways flight 1549 has been called by some the ‘miracle on the Hudson’ but the fact that nobody died
that day was no miracle. It was the skill, composure, and decisiveness of the airliners captain that saved the lives of the
150 passengers and 5 crew members that day.
I don’t mean to say that God had nothing to do with it; I mean to say that it was not blind luck that landed a 100
ton commercial airliner on the Hudson River. Perhaps it was divine intervention that put Chesley Sullenberger in the Captain’s
chair on that particular flight. Or perhaps it was simply the good luck of the 155 people on board that Sully was at the controls
that day.
I tend
to think fate or luck was not on the side of flight 1549 that day. How often will a plane strike a flock of Canadian Geese
over New York City, just seconds after takeoff? That kind of thing does not happen every day. Not only did the plane encounter
a flock of Turkey sized geese, but both of the planes GE engines ingested birds causing catastrophic failures of both. Compounding
the problem of the engine failures was the fact that the Airbus struck the birds at just 3,200 feet in altitude, too low to
attempt to land at any of the surrounding airports. Captain Sullenberger was forced to land on the Hudson River. As if these
circumstances were not bad enough, all of this was taking place in the dead of winter where ambient temperature were in the
low 20’s and River temperatures were in the low survivability range. Pretty much the worst situation imaginable, if
you asked me. I’d say the stars were aligned against the people on board that flight. It is a good thing it was Sully
at the controls that day and not those goofball pilots that ‘forgot’ to land in Minnesota a few months back.
Without a doubt Captain
Sullenberger saved the lives of ever passenger and crew member on that flight as well as unknown numbers of lives on the ground
with his swift decisions and supreme aviation skill. Sully is truly an American hero, and I was honored to be able to shake
his hand.
|
