Our lives are not segmented however parts of a continuous whole united with our past which explains, perhaps, inasmuch as events change they remain (intrinsically) the same.
• • •
Mr. Clinton, the ―Manchurian Candidate,‖ along with his Bolshevik wife, in what should soon prove to be a co-presidency, appear determined to kick establishment opinion in the groin. He (Mr. Clinton) seems to have a talent for dissimulation. President Bush, who is basically a good man, if anything else, is overmatched and overconfident. His overbearing complacency will mark his defeat come November. Perot, on the other hand, is a pretentious gadfly, albeit a wealthy one, determined to embarrass the president at whatever cost to his immense fortune. I believe that he will be somewhat of a factor in the upcoming election and should siphon a sizable portion of the popular vote, although I suspect his votes will have a negligible impact on the Electoral College.
• • •
1The rising crime rate remains a hot button issue with each party pointing the finger of blame at the other. The exponential increase in felonious crime (396 percent since 1960) covering the last eight (8) presidencies begs the question, which party stands accused of benign (urban) neglect that has reduced America‘s once thriving metropolitan centers to urban playgrounds and sandboxes? Although poverty has certainly been a contributing factor to our nation‘s urban malaise, it doesn‘t completely define the phenomenon. From an economic standpoint, even the poorest segments of society are incomparably better off financially than at the turn of the last century.
The problem as I see it centers on rising expectations. Wholesale improvement in our (collective) standard of living has failed to keep pace with our insatiable appetites driven less by what we lack or perceive is lacking rather than an envious desire of having what other people have for the sake of having it. In addition, our collective failure to properly distinguish between equality of opportunity and equality of results has produced an entitlement mindset. Everything else being equal, differences in aptitude and talent, motivation, values and (ingrained) habits, health or the lack of, not to mention accident and chance are all contributing factors to financial success. Finally, there exist among us incorrigibles; so-called enemies of society; sociopaths who commit acts of wanton violence not for (economic) gain but rather for perverse enjoyment. This last group, in particular, appears to be growing at an alarming rate.
• • •
The expression ―Tickle Down Economics‖ has come under assault in recent years by liberal economists and socialists of a Keynesian persuasion as ―pernicious‖ to the functioning of a well ordered society. It is often referred to by its liberal critics as ―Voodoo Economics‖ although I cannot possibly imagine how any clear-thinking individual could possibly argue against economic policies that have occasioned ninety-six months of unprecedented (economic) growth and the return of economic prosperity after nearly two decades of high inflation and unemployment. I suppose it all depends on one‘s point of view. Nevertheless, there remain skeptics among us, including, unfortunately, so-called moderates who (should) know better but, for expediency sake, are hoping to score political points by maintaining that our thriving economy has left far too many people behind and that the ―poorer‖ classes continue expanding at an ―unprecedented‖ rate, with the more militant among them continue equating our nation‘s economic climate with the Great Depression. Such hysteria fails to refute what recent experience has confirmed: that a (far) greater number of people embracing a variety of individuals and (ethnic) groups are presently enjoying the highest standard of living in nearly two decades. The poor, of course, will always be among us. The emphasis on a sound economic policy, however, should be on Movement. Statistical measurements are merely snapshots in time of individuals or individuals falling within certain groups (or classes) at a fixed point in time (and space). Statistics, properly understood, are constant, although the essential ―components‖ of statistical measurements, considered separately, oftentimes vary. Everything else being equal, an individual or an individual within a certain group (or class) who is poor, however defined, at a given point in time, like today for example, may not necessarily be classified as poor next year or next month or next week or tomorrow for that matter as the (economic) condition of that particular individual or individual within a certain group (or class) will generally vary over time. Economic indicators report raw data, such as the unemployment rate at a particular point in time. These indicators neither measure movement nor track the (economic) success of a particular individual or an individual falling within a certain group (or class) at a certain point in time. That is to say, these indicators do not necessarily measure the same people at different points of time in their lives but rather extract abstracts of such people understood in terms of (statistical) numbers. They oftentimes fail to account for individuals or individuals within a certain group (or class) who have risen above their present economic condition superseded by others. In this manner, it could be argued that statistical methods measure individuals or individuals within a certain group (or class) at a fixed point in time however do not necessarily measure movement as it relates to time and space; that is to say; they do not measure the same people at different points in their lives. Therefore, immigrants, for example, entering the country in search of economic opportunity, or those lacking skills and/or formal education are likely to be situated among the lower social and economic strata. Whether an individual chooses to live as a member of his or her own ethnic group or (or class) or as an outsider among members of another (ethnic) group is irrelevant. The greatest number, however, must invariably gravitate towards the lowest (economic and social) stratum. In time however, given a proper work ethic coupled with favorable economic opportunities, most should improve their social and economic standing. Economic assimilation, if history is any indication, has been a brilliant success in light of the many people from various ethnic backgrounds and races who continue to migrate to our shores either as individuals or as individuals within a certain group (or class) in search of a better life for themselves and their families. We should have cause for alarm, however, if over an indefinite period of time, the same individual or individual within a certain group (or class) were locked-in a cycle of poverty without recourse to a better life, which appears to be the case with some groups. This anomaly, however, should be considered a by-product of social engineering courtesy of big government beginning with the Great Society which I will treat later on.
• • •
How unfortunate that life is not (immediately) self-correcting and that many of us must often suffer the inevitable consequences of our own determinate actions or non-actions as the case may be. When we are willing to learn from our mistakes, however, and become a better person as a result of our experience, perhaps our oversights and/or lapses in judgment will have hopefully served some useful purpose.
• • •
I would like to say a word or two about term limits. Troubling as the continuation of mediocre leadership in government may seem to some of us, should a politically capable and talented individual, who has diligently pursued and honestly fulfilled the requirements of political office, be compelled to relinquish his or her seat by the imperatives of arbitrary laws rather than by free elections? Should individuals who have (consistently) demonstrated high moral character, generosity and (political) courage be held to the same standard(s) as another individual who is (either) morally or intellectually unfit for public office or has (otherwise) disgraced such 2privileges? It would seem that at a time in our nation‘s history when our (personal) liberties are coming under assault, we shouldn‘t be quick to surrender our elective privileges which arguably keep us one step ahead of Big Brother.
• • •
Unless I am interpreting events incorrectly, principles often seem to define the national debate while wallets typically underscore (parochial) points of view.
• • •
Our need to preserve our moral purpose, when unsupported by an uncertain future seeks its assurances in the past.
• • •
Political Correctness has undermined social relationships subjecting prospective friendships to litmus testing including, for example, what a person eats, drinks or, whether that person, heaven forbid, either smokes or consumes alcohol, thereby determining the suitability of forging (potential) friendships.
• • •
The achieving of one‘s fullest potential is the ultimate ―becoming‖
• • •
The willingness to endure (spiritual) hardship paves the road to ―becoming‖ .
• • •
Dignity neither indulges in Self-Pity nor receives Indulgences.
• • •
A thought about appeasement as it relates to Tyrants: Tyrants are unappeasable.
• • •
Childish Behavior is a by-product of stunted (emotional) development. Childlike Behavior, on the other hand, is the offspring of joyful innocence.
• • •
Judge what is; more so that which (is) seeks to become.
• • •
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, I believe, was genuinely concerned about the welfare of our nation. In retrospect, the New Deal, dismissed by many of its critics as an (economic) failure, nevertheless provided some measure of comfort and relief to people who needed it most. Providence, it seems, has a way of summoning the services of political and social‖visionaries‖, (however) distinguished, suited to the requirements of the times. FDR may have been such a man. (Ronald Reagan was certainly another) The 1930‘s were unusual times for our nation that required extraordinary measures to soften the effects of an Economic Depression triggered by intemperate (market) speculation and a prevailing sense of continuing prosperity that eventually humbled the global economy and brought it to a grinding halt. Roosevelt‘s New Deal, sought to restore dignity to the jobless and homeless. Implicit in its designs were monetary provisions in exchange for profitable work, a concept that has become conspicuously absent in today‘s welfare environment. Prior to Roosevelt‘s hard shift to the Left, a decision encouraged by his socialist advisors and political critics who argued that the program‘s initiatives weren‘t going far enough or reaching enough people, FDR, political realist that he was, understood the inherent limitations of Public Works conceived as a stopgap until authentic pro-growth measures would begin to weigh in and hasten economic recovery.He understood the importance of self-reliance and the inevitability that some people would (necessarily) lag behind because of (their) essential failings (if not the failings of the programs themselves, problematic in the eyes of many economic conservatives which is not the central issue here). Nevertheless, FDR sought to provide the greatest good for the greatest number while drawing a distinction between those seeking employment and the chronically unemployed. However sincere his intentions, his economic agenda would unwittingly lay the groundwork for the Welfare State including the trappings consistent with social engineering.
• • •
America‘s population at around the time of the Second World War was somewhere in the neighborhood of 135 million people. That number has steadily increased to 275 million. It seems that in whatever manner our nation tries to (efficiently) manage its diminishing resources, the continual rise in underemployment (as opposed to unemployment) is gradually reaching a ―saturation point‖ were (the) confluence of population growth and (the) concomitant requirements for job creation is hastening diminishing returns.
• • •
The ―Democratic Coalition‖ of the 1930s consisted of Labor, Farmers, Catholics and Immigrants, among other groups. Principled Democrats that many of them were, each group endeavored, through hard work and self-sacrifice, to assimilate into the American Mainstream with the hope of obtaining their ―fair‖ share of the American Dream. This, in sharp contrast with what nowadays is 3commonly referred to as the ―Rainbow Coalition‖ of disgruntled factions who are seeking to reconstruct society in a manner that accommodates their (own) private entitlement agenda. For such groups, the Common Good remains secondary to their own specific
―needs‖ at the cost of undermining the creditable standards of a generous nation whose historical mission has been to provide economic opportunities for all its citizens.
• • •
Homosexuality was once considered an aberrant form of behavior. Nowadays, it is generally considered an ―alternative lifestyle‖. This―progressive‖ change in attitude may be construed as the touchstone of a society which has either ―grown‖ or is morally regressing.
• • •
Limousine philanthropists and liberal do-gooders are ―ardently‖ committed to the welfare of ―Humankind‖ in an abstract manner whose ―good works‖ are oftentimes a calling of the Mind rather than the Heart; performed with an arrogant affectation of immediate purpose that serves in reinforcing one‘s own good opinion inspired by an egregious sense of their (own) ―lofty‖ morals and principals.
• • •
I am not necessarily opposed to unconventional or controversial methods as they (otherwise) relate to teaching provided that students are allowed sufficient latitude in making informed and reasonable decisions and that our schools and teachers seek to promote (intellectual) balance rather than reinforce a decidedly left-leaning social and political agenda. It is one thing to teach and another to influence susceptible young minds that haven‘t yet obtained (sufficient) insight to alternative viewpoints. I am especially troubled by the increasing number of schools that, rather than inspire provocative thinking, seek to advance (pre-packaged) ideas.
• • •
Multiculturalism does not enjoy the support of homogeneously minded individuals nor is this situation likely to change within the foreseeable future. Racial and Ethnic Integration, whether circumstantial or determined, is more likely to achieve a greater level of acceptance among contrasting types when left to their own devices because the act of (coming) together in this manner is perceived as a question of choice. Desegregation, on the other hand, is a coercive (political) action imposed upon unwilling individuals or groups by (judicial) fiat. The compulsory assimilation of diverse groups (against their will) possessing different values, customs, habits and points of view must inevitably promote resentment among individuals who perceive each other differently.
• • •
―Forced Busing‖ has not only inconvenienced families and communities alike, but its stated mission, since its inception, has fallen short of its intended designs. Its time, I believe, has finally passed. Government has endeavored to create a level playing field by relocating children from inner-city neighborhoods to ―better‖ schools located in suburban communities. The fact of the matter is that many of the children involved in this ―quixotic‖ attempt at achieving higher academic performance were unprepared for the (immediate) challenges facing them. A number of above average schools had to compromise academic standards in order to accommodate the influx of ‖under-educated‖ students who were ill-equipped to meet their demands . In some instances, such standards had to be reduced or eliminated altogether. I have always favored remedial programs designed to improve the academic performances of underachieving children that would make them academically competitive rather than setting those children up for failure, which happens to be the case most of the time. Under-Achievement has been (invariably) addressed by watering down (academic) standards, thereby depriving children of an opportunity of reaching their highest (intellectual) potential while curbing the development of brighter, more talented children who, engaged in a slower-paced environment, oftentimes find themselves shortchanged as well, while having to wait for the (intellectually) sluggish, indifferent or slower learners in general, to play catch-up.In the final analysis, such efforts aimed at achieving (academic) parity have served in further diminishing academic standards to the point where such standards are no longer meaningful. A universal pass/fail system will one day prove the most egregious, irrelevant standard of them all.
• • •
I support Bosnian intervention provided that our military objectives are clearly defined (including exit strategies) and that our fighting men and women receive proper training and provided the means of achieving their objectives quickly and efficiently lest our troops risk losing the support of the American People whose ―tolerance‖ for war remains vital to the military success of our fighting forces.
• • •
Liberals are hawkish on Bosnia, or at least many of them appear to be as evidenced by their support of America‘s intervention in that country‘s civil war. The perception of Human Rights violations committed against the Muslim population by Serbian troops has many of them in a lather. Such raises some very important questions including where were these self-styled freedom fighters twenty years ago when Human Rights were being routinely trampled on in South Vietnam and Cambodia? Where was their unqualified support for the Contra Freedom Fighters at war against a Marxian Dictatorship? Where was their sense of duty and honor and proportion, for that matter, for the (untold) millions who were slaughtered and abandoned by their putative allies or many individuals in our time left to the arbitrary currents of oppressive governments whose (ideological) doctrines place little or no value on human life? At what time were their muffled cries heard when defenseless women and children were being driven to the sea by the tens of thousands following the most egregious military withdrawal in American History? Perhaps things have changed in the wake of political correctness!4
• • •
I am convinced that we are slowing devolving into a godless society. Perhaps nothing best exemplifies this opinion than the irritatingly obtrusive ―Happy Holiday‖ which has superseded traditional Christmas greetings should, heaven forbid, Merry Christmas offend the secular sensibilities of non-Christians and nonbelievers alike. Christmas, it should be remembered, is not a ―holiday‖. For hundreds of millions of practicing Christians worldwide, it represents the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It seems ironic that our intolerance for traditional customs has increased in proportion to our tolerance for things ―diverse.‖
• • •
Poverty is a humbling experience. Nevertheless, and I‘m going to take some heat for saying this, there appears to be something human and less artificial among those trapped in its web. Perhaps such thinking is merely the romanticized musings of someone who has been more fortunate than most. I can lay claim, however, to my own humble beginnings, having been raised in a cold water flat (the building was condemned when I was six years old) in Manhattan until my parents moved on to greener pastures in the Bronx, New York. My immigrant father took whatever jobs he could find until he was finally able to secure a construction job that brought our family a steady paycheck. Although our family was poor, we were never ‖needy‖. Be that as it may, such concepts relating to rich or poor or lying somewhere in between are meaningless to preschoolers until ―comparative impressions‖ start kicking in, which, for most children, is generally around the time a child starts kindergarten. One good thing about poverty, provided it isn‘t severe, is that it conditions a family to properly manage their limited resources and improvise on the little they have. Poverty is thought provoking in the manner it spurs the imagination of things possible; however I digress. How wonderful it would be if our government were occasionally a dollar short so that it too might develop economical spending habits. (I forgot about taxes!) It seems that the more government has available to spend, the more it feels compelled to spend it. At any rate, I am not trying to make an argument for the good ole days, which weren‘t always so good, although heaven knows why many of us oftentimes feel the need to remind ourselves that they were. Neither am I making a case for poverty; you know, a character builder and all that. There‘s a tendency among some of us who have risen from humbler beginnings, however, to wear our (erstwhile) poverty on our sleeves as an affirmation of our―incomparable‖ achievement or perhaps we wax nostalgic for simpler times however ―unpleasant‖. Perhaps it‘s the struggle that we miss the most, that brought our families closer together or perhaps it‘s the (simple) pining of our lost youth.
• • •
It has often been said that inasmuch as things change they remain the same. This is partially true. (Essential) Human Nature, never changes; only the scope and limits of its immediate environment that conditions the way it thinks and acts.
• • •
The Special Prosecutor‘s Office has lost a great deal of credibility in recent years. This ―bipartisan‖ office was initially established to investigate and prosecute political figures found guilty of political misconduct and abuse of public office. It has subsequently devolved, however, into a quasi political agency consisting of political hacks commissioned to persecute or discredit political opposition.
• • •
The governor of the State of New York is proposing a bill that will increase cigarette taxes thereby raising the cost of a pack of cigarettes to $3.00, the highest in the nation; in this manner offsetting the fiscal ineptitude and corruption of our state officials whose gross mismanagement of the public treasury constitutes a greater sin than the sin tax itself.
• • •
The prison population received some welcome news from New York City after it announced plans to establish a Civilian Review Board, the kind that is likely to attract a number of ACLU types on its committee. This initiative should improve the chances for early parole for a number of hardened criminals who, in the interest of society, should otherwise serve their sentences. As usual, it‘s the victim and potential victims who always seem to take it in the neck!
• • •
Penal Systems were established to punish (hardened) criminal offenders by locking them behind prison walls. Efforts aimed at rehabilitating criminal elements should be pursued whenever possible without compromising its intended purpose, however.
• • •
The Surgeon General is hoping to encourage condom use (especially) among teenagers through public service announcements as part of the department‘s ―safe‖ sex education program. This is like distributing clean syringes to chronic drug users. Why not simply raise the white flag and lay down our (moral) arms. Society‘s inability to properly instruct and influence its own children by telling them in effect, that inasmuch as (some) parents are either unable or unwilling to control inappropriate behavior, let‘s at least make improper conduct safer; in this manner sending a mixed message to our ―wayward‖ sons and daughters.
• • •
A major obstacle often encountered in most relationships is the expectation of mutual reciprocity; that is to say; expecting a ―fair‖ or proper return of affection equal in proportion to one‘s own measure. I don‘t believe that this is possible, however, because of the 5emotional boundaries that naturally limit an individual‘s capacity to either love or to love in return. The best any of us could hope for is that we continue loving others in a manner consistent with our nature or capacity to love while placing our hope and trust in the reciprocal affection of those we love.
• • •
Abraham Lincoln said that ―a government must not be as strong as to challenge the liberties of a free society while at the same time remaining strong enough to maintain its existence‖. Despite the number of rhetorical portents emanating from partisan politicians and doomsayers about the imminent demise of democratic principles and rule of law, a political dictatorship (I am using an extreme example) in this country would be very unlikely. Our nation‘s scrupulously crafted system of Liberal Republicanism, deeply imbedded in our political and social institutions, has rendered this an unlikely possibility, unlike old world cultures whose political origins were founded on authoritarian, monarchial or tribal traditions. America‘s Declaration of Independence inspired the thinking of an incipient nation whose formative ideas would one day lay the cornerstone of our inimitable Constitution. This great document was not artificially conceived. It acquired a spiritual character inspired by the principles of Natural Law and Equal Rights of Men eloquently expressed in the political writings of Locke, Paine, Montesquieu and Burke among others. That our system of government might someday submit itself to tyranny is diametrically opposed to the American mindset accustomed to freedom, unlike (subject) societies whose uncertain social and political environments keep many of its citizen living on the edge of tyranny. The political prototype established by Americans for Americans is unique in the manner it was able to harness and (limit) the energies and imaginations of thirteen independent colonies while integrating them without unduly compromising their singular authority.
• • •
Circumstances and events have elevated many people to greatness. Nevertheless, those willing to confront potential challenges possessed the character, ability and mindset to override them.
• • •
The ―demise‖ of Communism is likely to re-ignite national prejudices in the Baltic States and Eastern Europe. Economic instability will likely ensue. Western Europe has been slow to learn the lessons imparted by two world wars that reduced many of its nations to the second rank. It will be interesting to observe how events will eventually unfold. I expect Western Europe may gradually re-open its markets to its Eastern neighbors although they have their own (economic) issues to deal with. The United States, on the other hand, will need to assume a stronger presence in that region by encouraging free and open markets that will allow these nation‘s to prosper.It might also prove to be an excellent opportunity for America to ―repair‖ fragile relations.
• • •
Attempts to control spiraling health care costs will require the reining of special interest groups which is unlikely to happen any time soon as long as taxpayer recourse remains the fallback option.
• • •
The underlying principles of ―equality‖ under the law have been grossly overstated by our higher courts whose primary function should be legal interpretation; assuring that existing laws are being properly and evenly applied without regard to special interests or favored classes or groups. It is unfortunate, however, that many of our courts are becoming (de facto) less juridical and more of an auxiliary law-making ‖branch‖ of the government where activist judges seek to adapt the elasticity of constitutional law to their (own) privately held views of Justice.
• • •
Contrasting Liberalism Old and New: The older version encouraged entrepreneurship; the modern rendition, regulation and statutory restrictions. Classical Liberalism supported individual rights; Modern Liberalism, group rights. The (old) was subservient to the will of the people while the (new) has assumed the role of Social Guardian.
• • •
Housing Starts has increased 18.5 percent over the past year. This isn‘t too shabby for an economy that candidate Clinton suggested was on the brink of a Depression. Mr. Bush‘s laid back, elitist incumbency (perhaps he should have campaigned on his front porch) has ushered a fifth columnist who, heaven preserve us, will never be elected to a second term!
• • •
It follows that peace is conditioned in advance of naught once a threat has properly revealed itself.
• • •
Freedom and Power are synonymous: Freedom is a position of Power while Power is the Freedom of Choice. However limited or broad in scope, their relationship is certain.
• • •
The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s was not the panecean quick fix that many of its (avid) supporters had initially hoped for.Redundant in many ways, it reinforced existing statutes by establishing more laws without addressing essential issues of immediate 6